Wong Wing Sing v. Nagle

Ninth Circuit

Wong Wing Sing v. Nagle

299 F. 601, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3112

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 27, 1924

DocketNo. 4215

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 299 F. 601 (Wong Wing Sing v. Nagle) 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

Wong Wing Sing v. Nagle, 299 F. 601, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3112 (9th Cir. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The appellants thus state their case:

“This is not the case of a Chinese person applying for admission into the United States for the first time upon the claim that he is a native born citizen; but it is the case of a Chinese person who had been regularly admitted into the United States as a native-born citizen, who had established a residence in the United States, who had not abandoned his residence, who left the United States for a temporary visit to China, and who upon his return applied for admission as a resident citizen of the United States, and supported his claim by proofs which showed that his claim was not frivolous.”

Under these facts, the appellants contend that they were entitled to a judicial hearing on the question of citizenship. In answer to a similar contention, in Ex parte Yoshimasa Nomura, 297 Fed. 191, this court said:

“The appellant makes the point that he was entitled to a judicial hearing on the question of his citizenship. But the appellant is in the position of one who is stopped at the border seeking to enter the country, and his right is determinable without a judicial hearing, or .a hearing other than that which was had.”

The order is affirmed.

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

RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The appellants thus state their case:

“This is not the case of a Chinese person applying for admission into the United States for the first time upon the claim that he is a native born citizen; but it is the case of a Chinese person who had been regularly admitted into the United States as a native-born citizen, who had established a residence in the United States, who had not abandoned his residence, who left the United States for a temporary visit to China, and who upon his return applied for admission as a resident citizen of the United States, and supported his claim by proofs which showed that his claim was not frivolous.”

Under these facts, the appellants contend that they were entitled to a judicial hearing on the question of citizenship. In answer to a similar contention, in Ex parte Yoshimasa Nomura, 297 Fed. 191, this court said:

“The appellant makes the point that he was entitled to a judicial hearing on the question of his citizenship. But the appellant is in the position of one who is stopped at the border seeking to enter the country, and his right is determinable without a judicial hearing, or .a hearing other than that which was had.”

The order is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 F. 601, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 3112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wong-wing-sing-v-nagle-ca9-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack