Giacomo D'AnDreA v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service

Sixth Circuit

Giacomo D'AnDreA v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service

335 F.2d 377, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4479

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedAugust 17, 1964

Docket15744_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 335 F.2d 377 (Giacomo D'AnDreA v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Giacomo D'AnDreA v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, 335 F.2d 377, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4479 (6th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner seeks review by this Court of an order of deportation and a denial of his application for voluntary departure. He was an Italian national admitted to the United States on a nonquota immigrant visa issued to him on the basis of his marriage in Italy to a citizen of the United States. The ground for deportation was that his immigrant visa had been procured by fraud, it appearing that he had failed or refused to fulfill his marital agreement which was entered into for the purpose of procuring his entry as an immigrant.

He challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the order of deportation and the finding that he was ineligible for voluntary departure. He had a hearing before a special inquiry officer resulting in an adverse decision. His appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals was dismissed.

A review of the record convinces us that there was abundant evidence to support the deportation order even though some of it was conflicting. The credibility of witnesses was for the special inquiry officer and the Board to determine. Their findings of fact are binding on us when supported by substantial evidence.

There was evidence to support the finding that the sole purpose of petitioner’s marriage in Italy was to evade the immigration laws. Petitioner and his wife never lived together after the ceremony was performed. He never supported her. He later obtained a divorce from her in Cleveland. Prior to the divorce and. during the marital relationship, petitioner committed adultery with a single woman. From this adulterous relationship one child was born and another conceived. After petitioner obtained the-divorce, he married this woman and their second child was bom. Petitioner is-supporting and living with this wife and. their two children.

In our opinion, the Board was. justified in finding that the adulterous relationship made petitioner ineligible for voluntary departure. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f) (2).

Judgment will be entered in favor of respondent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner seeks review by this Court of an order of deportation and a denial of his application for voluntary departure. He was an Italian national admitted to the United States on a nonquota immigrant visa issued to him on the basis of his marriage in Italy to a citizen of the United States. The ground for deportation was that his immigrant visa had been procured by fraud, it appearing that he had failed or refused to fulfill his marital agreement which was entered into for the purpose of procuring his entry as an immigrant.

He challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the order of deportation and the finding that he was ineligible for voluntary departure. He had a hearing before a special inquiry officer resulting in an adverse decision. His appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals was dismissed.

A review of the record convinces us that there was abundant evidence to support the deportation order even though some of it was conflicting. The credibility of witnesses was for the special inquiry officer and the Board to determine. Their findings of fact are binding on us when supported by substantial evidence.

There was evidence to support the finding that the sole purpose of petitioner’s marriage in Italy was to evade the immigration laws. Petitioner and his wife never lived together after the ceremony was performed. He never supported her. He later obtained a divorce from her in Cleveland. Prior to the divorce and. during the marital relationship, petitioner committed adultery with a single woman. From this adulterous relationship one child was born and another conceived. After petitioner obtained the-divorce, he married this woman and their second child was bom. Petitioner is-supporting and living with this wife and. their two children.

In our opinion, the Board was. justified in finding that the adulterous relationship made petitioner ineligible for voluntary departure. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f) (2).

Judgment will be entered in favor of respondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

335 F.2d 377, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4479, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giacomo-dandrea-v-united-states-immigration-and-naturalization-service-ca6-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack