United States v. O'ROURKE, No. 14978.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtSANBORN, WOODROUGH, and THOMAS, Circuit
Citation211 F.2d 609
PartiesUNITED STATES ex rel. IMPASTATO v. O'ROURKE, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Docket NumberNo. 14978.
Decision Date18 May 1954

211 F.2d 609 (1954)

UNITED STATES ex rel. IMPASTATO
v.
O'ROURKE, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service.

No. 14978.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

April 21, 1954.

Rehearing Denied May 18, 1954.


James Daleo, Kansas City, Mo., for appellant.

Horace Warren Kimbrell, Asst. U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo. (Edward L. Scheufler, U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., and William O. Russell, Asst. U. S. Atty., Joplin, Mo., on the brief), for appellee.

Before SANBORN, WOODROUGH, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

SANBORN, Circuit Judge.

Nicolo Impastato, an alien in custody under a warrant of deportation issued July 22, 1953, petitioned the District Court for release on habeas corpus. The court issued an order to show cause directed to the respondent (appellee). After the respondent's return and after a hearing, the court dismissed Impastato's petition, and he has appealed.

The deportation warrant followed such proceedings conducted by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice as are usual in like cases. Impastato was accorded a hearing before a Special Inquiry Officer of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and was represented at the hearing by counsel of his own choosing. The charges which Impastato was called upon to meet were that he was an alien who had entered the United States after July 1, 1924, without an immigration visa and without inspection, and that in 1943 he had been convicted in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri of having concealed and facilitated the concealment of heroin, knowing that it had been unlawfully imported into the United States. The only seriously contested issue of fact at the hearing was whether Impastato entered the United States prior to July 1, 1924, when an immigration visa was not required by law, or after that date, when such a visa was required.

Impastato testified at the hearing before the Special Inquiry Officer that he

211 F.2d 610
is a citizen of Italy, and was born June 1, 1900, at Cinisi, Province of Palermo, Italy; that he entered the United States at New York on December 8, 1923, arriving on the SS Paris, and has been in this country ever since; that at the time of his entry he did not have a valid immigration visa; that he gained entry under the pretense that he was a member of the crew of the vessel and by using a pass given him by an officer of the ship; and that he was not questioned or inspected by an immigration officer when he left the ship

The Immigration and Naturalization Service at the hearing produced documentary evidence, consisting of affidavits and copies of records procured through the State Department from sources in Italy, tending to show that Impastato did not leave that country until several years after 1924. He was given ample opportunity to produce evidence to corroborate his claim that he entered the United States prior to July 1, 1924, and to refute the showing that he had not left Italy by that date, but failed to do so.

The evidence, in the deportation hearing, as to Impastato's conviction on a narcotics charge showed that on April 13, 1943, he entered a plea of guilty to an indictment charging him and others with concealment and facilitating the concealment of heroin which they knew was unlawfully imported into the United States, and also showed that the court sentenced him to imprisonment for two years. The evidence further showed that, pursuant to § 155(a), Title 8 U.S.C. (1940 Ed.),1 the sentencing judge, on April 14, 1943, recommended that Impastato be not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • Hyun v. Landon, No. 14058.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 7 Abril 1955
    ...302, 71 L. Ed. 560; and Ex parte Jurgans, D.C. 1927, 17 F.2d 507. See, also, United States ex rel. Impastato v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 1954, 211 F.2d 609, and the collection of authority contained therein at page The Substantiality of the Evidence It is next urged by appellant that the deportati......
  • Vlisidis v. Holland, Civ. A. No. 21438
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • 3 Julio 1957
    ...as to admissibility of evidence need not be followed in deportation hearings, see United States ex rel. Impasto v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 1954, 211 F.2d 609, 611. It could not conceivably be contended, therefore, that the rules as to admission of evidence are more strict in the administrative he......
  • Yiannopoulos v. Robinson, No. 11816.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • 23 Agosto 1957
    ...the decision of the agency. Navarrette-Navarrette v. Landon, 9 Cir., 223 F.2d 234; United States ex rel. Impostato v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 211 F.2d 609; Sisto v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 86 U.S.App. D.C. 31, 179 F.2d 47; Jung Sam v. Haff, 9 Cir., 116 F.2d 384; Hays v. Zahariades, 3 Cir., 90 F.......
  • Langoria-Castenada v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, LONGORIA-CASTENAD
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 19 Enero 1977
    ...is involved, which petitioner has not alleged here. Maroon v. I&NS, 364 F.2d 982, 986 (8th Cir. 1966); United States v. O'Rourke, 211 F.2d 609, 611 (8th Cir. 1954). Furthermore, upon specific questioning by the immigration judge who pointed out that the conviction record had been certif......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Hyun v. Landon, No. 14058.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 7 Abril 1955
    ...302, 71 L. Ed. 560; and Ex parte Jurgans, D.C. 1927, 17 F.2d 507. See, also, United States ex rel. Impastato v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 1954, 211 F.2d 609, and the collection of authority contained therein at page The Substantiality of the Evidence It is next urged by appellant that the deportati......
  • Vlisidis v. Holland, Civ. A. No. 21438
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • 3 Julio 1957
    ...as to admissibility of evidence need not be followed in deportation hearings, see United States ex rel. Impasto v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 1954, 211 F.2d 609, 611. It could not conceivably be contended, therefore, that the rules as to admission of evidence are more strict in the administrative he......
  • Yiannopoulos v. Robinson, No. 11816.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • 23 Agosto 1957
    ...the decision of the agency. Navarrette-Navarrette v. Landon, 9 Cir., 223 F.2d 234; United States ex rel. Impostato v. O'Rourke, 8 Cir., 211 F.2d 609; Sisto v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 86 U.S.App. D.C. 31, 179 F.2d 47; Jung Sam v. Haff, 9 Cir., 116 F.2d 384; Hays v. Zahariades, 3 Cir., 90 F.......
  • Langoria-Castenada v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, LONGORIA-CASTENAD
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • 19 Enero 1977
    ...is involved, which petitioner has not alleged here. Maroon v. I&NS, 364 F.2d 982, 986 (8th Cir. 1966); United States v. O'Rourke, 211 F.2d 609, 611 (8th Cir. 1954). Furthermore, upon specific questioning by the immigration judge who pointed out that the conviction record had been certif......
  • 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