K

9 I. & N. Dec. 585
CourtBoard of Immigration Appeals
DecidedJuly 1, 1962
Docket1198
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 9 I. & N. Dec. 585 (K) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Immigration Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
K, 9 I. & N. Dec. 585 (bia 1962).

Opinion

MA1TER OF K—

In DEPORTATION Proceedings A-8178715 Decided by Board March 9, 1962

Deportability—Entry without inspection by falsely claiming United States cit- itzenship—Eaemption under section 241(f) of 1952 act, as amended—Effcct of 8 CFR 242.7a. (1) Having been granted, under section 212(c), a none pro tune waiver of inadmissibility based on conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, respondent is relieved from deportability by the application of section 241(I) of the Act with respect to entry without inspection resulting from his false claim to United States citizenship and the concomitant exercise of section 211(b) to waive the documentary ground. (2) 8 CFR 242.7a authorizes the favorable exercise of the discretion con- tained in section 211(b) for persons not otherwise subject to deportation who are "qualified for an exemption from deportability under section 241 (f)"; that language also covers other deportation grounds flowing di- rectly from the "fraud or misrepresentation" referred to specifically in sec- tion 241(f). The section of law under which the deportation charge is laid is immaterial; in this case section 241(f) exempts the respondent from de- portation under section 241(a) (2) as an alien who entered without Inspection.

Ca A.soss : Order: Act of 1952—Section 241(a) (1) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (1)1—Excludable at time of entry under section 212(a) (9) as an alien convicted of cri me. Lodged: Act of 1952—Section 241(a) (2) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (2)1—Entered without inspection.

BEFORE THE BOARD

DISCUSSION: The special inquiry officer, on October 25, 1961, entered an order terminating this proceeding by waiving the de- portation charges that the respondent was excludable at the time pf entry as a criminal alien and deportable as one who entered without inspection (8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (1) and (2)). The order has been certified to us for review of the discretionary action taken by the special inquiry officer and for final decision (8 CFR 3.1(c) and 103.4). The Immigration Service takes no exception to the order of the special inquiry officer. 585 The respondent, a native and citizen of Poland, male, unmarried, 19 years of age, was admitted to the United States for permanent residence at the port of New York on December 1, 1951. He was convicted on October 23, 1959, in the Circuit Court of Oakland County, Michigan, for the crime of breaking and entering in the daytime and sentenced to a term of probation of throe years, the first 80 days of which he was confined in the Oakland County Jail. The respondent last entered the United States through the port of Detroit, Michigan, on or about December 15, 1960. The immigration officer permitted him to enter on the strength of his statement that he was a citizen of the United States. The respondent concedes that he is deportable as charged under 8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (1) and ( a) (2). The respondent applied for discretionary relief in the form of waivers of the deportation charges under the discretion provided by sections 211(h), 219(c), and 941(f) of the. Tmmigrat ion and .

Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1181(b), 1182(c), and 1251(f)). A nunc pro tanc 2 waive: under section 212(c), supra, of the criminal ground for exclusion presents no difficulty. The respondent meets the statutory requirements of this provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act. He is an alien who was lawfully admitted far permanent residence on December 1, 1951. His voluntary de- parture to Canada was for a temporary visit of two hours. He was returning to a lawful unrelinquished domicile of seven con- secutive years when he reentered the United States on or about December 15, 1960. The reports of investigation by the Immigra- tion and Naturalization Service and the probation officer clearly indicate that a favorable exercise of the discretion contained in section 212(c) is warranted in the respondent's case. The principal issue presented by the case is whether there is a sound basis in law for the special inquiry officer's conclusion that the respondent's immigration status can be fully adjusted by waiving the remaining deportation charge, to wit, "that he last entered without inspection." Ordinarily, in the case of a surrepti- tious entry this charge cannot be waived. However, in respondent's ease he entered without inspection by falsely claiming to the im- migration officer that he was a citizen of the United States. His entry, therefore, was by fraud in that he misrepresented his true nationality. See Appendix for the text of sections 211(b), 212(c) - and 241(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 2 Relief may be granted, nun° pro tune, in deportation proceedings where the charge is based on grounds for exclusion existing at the time of entry if the exercise of discretion was then available. Matter of P , 7-713; Matter —

of F—, 6 537. -

586 The fact that the "entry withoul inspection" charge flows from the respondent's misrepresentation of his true nationality raises the ouestion of whether ha qualifies for an exemption from deporta- hilitv under a recent amendment, to section 241 of the Immigration -

and Nationality Art, P.L. 87-301, _let. of September '26, 1261, adds subsection (if) to the provisions of section 241 (see Appendix). Section 241(f), insofar as is pertinent here, provides in substance alien is not subject to deportation on the ground that he era , nelable at the time of entry as an alien who sought"... entry Tinted States by fraud or misrepresentation . .." provided '(en is "otherwise. admissible" and is "the spouse, parent, or a o f i_united States cifi en 1r of en alien lawfully admitted 1:',77 )1; residence' (S '251(f)). respondent, 19 years of ne. and -ortmarried, is a "child" of (c .. resident alien a the quoted term is defined by section (1)(C) of the immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. l(ll(b) (1) (C.3) ). Tie is also an alien who was excludable at the time of entry as one who sought to enter the United states by fraud r epresentation. The remaining consideration, insofar as ad- ing the respondent's immigration status under the provisions of section 241(f), supra, is a determination of whether the respondent can qualify as an "otherwise admissible" alien at the time of his last entry on or about December 15. 1960. If he can, section 241(f) requires the termination of deportation proceedings in cases where the alien would have been admissible except for the fact that he made a misrepresentation to secure entry (Matter of Y , 8 143 —

(=M.A., 1959). To reach a conclusion as to whether the respondent could qualify as an "otherwise admissible" alien at the time of entry and therefore, within the provisions of section 241(f), supra, it is necessary to review the grounds of inadmissibility which existed at the time of respondent's last entry. We have already noted that the respond- ent was inadmissible as a criminal alien under section 212(a) (9) (8 U.S.C. 1182(a) (9)).

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

Related

LEE
13 I. & N. Dec. 214 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1969)
CHAN
12 I. & N. Dec. 479 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 I. & N. Dec. 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/k-bia-1962.