United States ex rel. Portada v. Day

Decision Date07 December 1926
PartiesUNITED STATES ex rel. PORTADA v. DAY, Commissioner of Immigration, et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

John M. Lyons, of New York City, for relator.

Emory R. Buckner, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Alvin McKinley Sylvester, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for respondents.

GODDARD, District Judge.

The relator has been ordered deported to Italy on a warrant issued by the Second Assistant Secretary of Labor on December 21, 1925, which warrant charged:

"That he was a person likely to become a public charge at the time of his entry, and that he has been sentenced subsequent to May 1, 1917, to imprisonment for a term of one year or more because of conviction in this country of a crime involving moral turpitude, to wit, issuing check without sufficient funds in bank, committed within five years after his entry."

From the record it appears that the relator is 34 years of age, married, and has a wife and two children, who were born in the United States. He has been in this country all of the time since April 2, 1913, with the exception of nine months in 1921, when he returned to Italy to bring his mother here. In the summer of 1924 he went to California to purchase fruit; he being a small fruit dealer in New York City. In the course of his dealings while there, he delivered to a commission man a check for $100. A few days later this person telephoned to him that he lost the check and wanted another; the relator thereupon drew a second check without stopping payment on the first, which second check the commission man attempted to cash, but found that there was insufficient funds in the bank to meet it, the deficiency being some $7.50. In fairness to the relator, it should also be added that the record shows he did have sufficient funds in the bank to meet one check of $100, and it was upon the representation of the one to whom he had delivered it that it was lost that he drew another check, and the reason why there was not sufficient funds to meet the second check was because, as it subsequently appeared, his representation was false, as he had already collected on the first check. This same person caused the relator's arrest based on the charge that he had willfully delivered to him a check without having sufficient funds to meet it, which, under the laws of the state of California, is prohibited. The relator retained one whom he thought was an attorney, but who turned out to be otherwise, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Jordan v. De George
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1951
    ...United States ex rel. Medich v. Burmaster, 8 Cir., 1928, 24 F.2d 57; issuing checks with intent to defraud, United States ex rel. Portada v. Day, D.C.1926, 16 F.2d 328. In the state courts, crimes involving fraud have universally been held to involve moral Moreover, there have been two othe......
  • Matter of McNaughton
    • United States
    • U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals
    • July 26, 1978
    ...Amato v. Commissioner of Immigration Ellis Island, New York Harbor, 18 F.Supp. 480 (S.D.N.Y.1937) (petty larceny); U.S. ex rel. Portada v. Day, 16 F.2d 328 (S.D.N.Y.1926) (issuing of checks without sufficient funds, with intent to defraud); Ponzi v. Ward, 7 F.Supp. 736 (D.Mass.1934) (use of......
  • Matter of Bader
    • United States
    • U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals
    • September 24, 1980
    ...Amato v. Commissioner of Immigration, Ellis Island, New York Harbor, 18 F.Supp. 480 (S.D.N.Y.1937) (petty larceny); U.S. ex rel. Portada v. Day, 16 F.2d 328 (S.D.N.Y.1926) (issuing of checks without sufficient funds, with intent to defraud); Ponzi v. Ward, 7 F.Supp. 736 (D.Mass.1934) (use o......
  • United States v. Savoretti
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • December 10, 1952
    ...relief shall be upon the alien." 6 See Matter of N., 3 Immigration and Naturalization Decisions, page 723. 7 See United States ex rel. Portada v. Day, D.C., 16 F.2d 328 (issuing a check with intent to defraud); United States ex rel. Volpe v. Smith, Director of Immigration, 289 U.S. 422, 53 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT