Lexplug logoLexplug

United States v. Deanna Costello

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
2012 WL 266864, 666 F.3d 1040, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1786 (2012)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The term "harboring" under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) requires more than merely providing shelter or cohabiting with a known illegal alien. The statute implies an element of deliberately safeguarding the alien from authorities or providing a refuge to substantially facilitate their illegal presence, beyond simple cohabitation.


Facts:

  • Deanna L. Costello, an American citizen, was in a romantic relationship with a Mexican man whom she knew to be an illegal alien.
  • The man lived with Costello in her Cahokia, Illinois home for approximately one year until he was arrested on a federal drug charge in July 2003.
  • Following his conviction and imprisonment for the drug charge, the man was removed to Mexico.
  • The man later returned to the United States without authorization.
  • In March 2006, Costello picked him up from a Greyhound bus station in St. Louis and drove him back to her home in Cahokia.
  • He lived with Costello again more or less continuously until he was arrested on new drug charges in October 2006.

Procedural Posture:

  • Deanna L. Costello was charged in U.S. District Court with violating 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(l)(A)(iii) for harboring an illegal alien.
  • The parties agreed to a bench trial, submitting the case to a judge based on a set of stipulated facts.
  • The district court judge found Costello guilty.
  • The court sentenced Costello to two years’ probation and a $200 fine.
  • Costello, as the appellant, appealed her conviction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Locked

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 merely allowing a known illegal alien, with whom one has a romantic relationship, to cohabit in one's home constitute 'harboring' under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii)?


Opinions:

Majority - Posner, Circuit Judge

No. Merely allowing a known illegal alien to cohabit in one's home does not constitute 'harboring' under the statute. The court reasons that 'harboring' must be interpreted in the context of its surrounding statutory terms, 'conceals' and 'shields from detection,' which suggest an affirmative act of hiding or protecting someone from authorities. A simple dictionary definition of 'harboring' as 'sheltering' is overly broad and would lead to absurd results, potentially criminalizing millions of people for ordinary social interactions. The word 'harboring' connotes deliberately safeguarding a person from authorities or providing a refuge, not merely cohabiting with a romantic partner. In this case, there was no evidence Costello intended to hide her boyfriend; in fact, the authorities already knew her address from his previous arrest, so living with her did not make him safer from detection.


Dissenting - Manion, Circuit Judge

Yes. Allowing a known illegal alien to cohabit in one's home does constitute 'harboring.' The dissent argues that the court should apply the plain, ordinary meaning of 'harbor,' which includes providing shelter. Costello did more than just cohabit; she knowingly provided a safe haven for seven months to a convicted felon who had been deported and had illegally reentered the country. Her home, protected by the Fourth Amendment, was a refuge that made it less likely for authorities to discover him. The majority's narrow interpretation usurps the prosecutor's discretion and invades the province of Congress by adding requirements not present in the statute's text.



Analysis:

This decision significantly narrows the potential scope of the federal alien harboring statute by rejecting a broad, literal interpretation. It establishes that a conviction for harboring requires proof of more than just knowledge of illegal status and providing shelter; there must be an element of intentional safeguarding from detection. This precedent protects individuals in close personal or familial relationships from facing felony charges for cohabitation with undocumented relatives or partners. It forces the government to prove a defendant's specific intent to help an alien evade immigration law, rather than just inferring it from the act of living together.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query United States v. Deanna Costello (2012) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for United States v. Deanna Costello