Del Guercio v. Delgadillo
159 F.2d 130, 1947 U.S. App. LEXIS 2441 (1947)
Rule of Law:
Under the Immigration Act of 1917, any arrival of an alien from a foreign country into the United States constitutes an 'entry,' regardless of whether the departure was unintended or the return followed a forced landing caused by wartime hazards.
Facts:
- Appellee, a citizen of Mexico, was admitted to the United States for permanent residence in 1923 and resided there continuously until 1942.
- In June 1942, Appellee served as a crew member on an American ship under the control of the United States Government during World War II.
- On July 12, 1942, the ship was torpedoed by enemy forces; Appellee was rescued and taken to Cuba, where he remained for one week.
- Appellee was flown from Cuba to Miami, Florida, and admitted by immigration officers.
- On March 27, 1944, Appellee was convicted of second-degree robbery in California.
- He was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of one year to life.
- Because the robbery conviction occurred within five years of his 1942 return from Cuba, immigration authorities designated him for deportation based on committing a crime involving moral turpitude within five years of entry.
Procedural Posture:
- Immigration officials issued a warrant for Appellee's arrest and held deportation hearings at San Quentin Penitentiary.
- The Presiding Inspector recommended deportation, and the Board of Immigration Appeals adopted this recommendation.
- Appellee surrendered to the custody of the Immigration Director.
- Appellee petitioned the District Court for a writ of habeas corpus.
- The District Court granted the writ and ordered Appellee discharged from custody.
- The Immigration Director (Appellant) appealed the order of discharge to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a resident alien's return to the United States constitute a new 'entry' under the Immigration Act when his presence in a foreign country was solely the result of his ship being torpedoed by enemy forces and his subsequent rescue?
Opinions:
Majority - Circuit Judge Orr
Yes, the return constitutes an 'entry' because the statutory definition encompasses any coming of an alien from a foreign country, regardless of intent or the involuntary nature of the journey. The court reasons that Supreme Court precedent defines 'entry' broadly to include any arrival from a foreign port or place. The court cites previous decisions holding that even shipwrecked sailors or extradited individuals make an 'entry' upon return. The court concludes that the exigencies of war and the fact that the alien was risking his life for the United States do not alter the strict statutory definition. The legal consequence (deportation) arises not from the entry itself, but from the commission of a felony shortly thereafter.
Analysis:
This decision illustrates a strict textualist approach to immigration statutes during the mid-20th century, prioritizing statutory definitions over equitable considerations or intent. By ruling that an involuntary departure due to enemy attack resets the 'entry' clock for deportation purposes, the court significantly expanded the vulnerability of resident aliens to deportation. This interpretation means that any departure from U.S. territory, even one completely beyond the alien's control such as a wartime shipwreck, subjects a long-term resident to the same probationary standards as a new immigrant.
