Mendoza-Martinez v. MacKey

Ninth Circuit

Mendoza-Martinez v. MacKey

238 F.2d 239, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4014

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 2, 1956

Docket14997_1

StatusPublished

This text of 238 F.2d 239 (Mendoza-Martinez v. MacKey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mendoza-Martinez v. MacKey, 238 F.2d 239, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4014 (9th Cir. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

238 F.2d 239

Francisco MENDOZA-MARTINEZ, Appellant,
v.
Argyle R. MACKEY, Commissioner of Immigration and
Naturalization and Herbert Brownell, Attorney
General of the United States, Appellees.

No. 14997.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 2, 1956.

Vincent P. DiGiorgio, DiGiorgio & Davis, Bakersfield, Cal., for appellant.

Laughlin E. Waters, U.S. Atty., Max F. Deutz, James R. Dooley, Asst. U.S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellees.

Before BONE, ORR and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Mendoza-Martinez appeals from an adverse judgment in an action for declaratory judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Northern Division.

Appellant departed the United States in 1942 for Mexico and remained there until 1946. Upon his return to the United States, he was convicted for draft evasion under 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 311.1 While in custody, appellant was arrested by the Immigration and Naturalization Service for illegal entry; the warrant alleged expatriation under Sec. 401(j) of the Nationality Act of 1940, 54 Stat. 1168 (1940), as amended by 58 Stat. 746 (1944).2 The statute provided, in substance, for loss of United States nationality by departing from or remaining outside United States jurisdiction during a national emergency for the purpose of evading or avoiding military service.

After exhausting administrative remedies, appellant brought this action for declaratory relief. Appellant's sole contention is that Sec. 401(j) is unconstitutional. This Court has twice held said section to be constitutional; on authority of Gonzalez v. Landon, 9 Cir., 1954, 215 F.2d 955, reversed on other grounds 350 U.S. 920, 76 S.Ct. 210, and Vidales v. Brownell, 9 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 136, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

1

Now Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 462

2

Now Immigration and Nationality Act 1952, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1481(a)

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

238 F.2d 239

Francisco MENDOZA-MARTINEZ, Appellant,
v.
Argyle R. MACKEY, Commissioner of Immigration and
Naturalization and Herbert Brownell, Attorney
General of the United States, Appellees.

No. 14997.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 2, 1956.

Vincent P. DiGiorgio, DiGiorgio & Davis, Bakersfield, Cal., for appellant.

Laughlin E. Waters, U.S. Atty., Max F. Deutz, James R. Dooley, Asst. U.S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellees.

Before BONE, ORR and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Mendoza-Martinez appeals from an adverse judgment in an action for declaratory judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Northern Division.

Appellant departed the United States in 1942 for Mexico and remained there until 1946. Upon his return to the United States, he was convicted for draft evasion under 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 311.1 While in custody, appellant was arrested by the Immigration and Naturalization Service for illegal entry; the warrant alleged expatriation under Sec. 401(j) of the Nationality Act of 1940, 54 Stat. 1168 (1940), as amended by 58 Stat. 746 (1944).2 The statute provided, in substance, for loss of United States nationality by departing from or remaining outside United States jurisdiction during a national emergency for the purpose of evading or avoiding military service.

After exhausting administrative remedies, appellant brought this action for declaratory relief. Appellant's sole contention is that Sec. 401(j) is unconstitutional. This Court has twice held said section to be constitutional; on authority of Gonzalez v. Landon, 9 Cir., 1954, 215 F.2d 955, reversed on other grounds 350 U.S. 920, 76 S.Ct. 210, and Vidales v. Brownell, 9 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 136, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

1

Now Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 462

2

Now Immigration and Nationality Act 1952, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1481(a)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 F.2d 239, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mendoza-martinez-v-mackey-ca9-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack