A-1021747.
Decided by Board June 7, 1946. Approved by Attorney General June 21, 1946.
Suspension of deportation — Section 19 (c) (2) of the act of February 5, 1917, as amended — Good moral character — Single lapse from good moral conduct during statutory period.
A deportable alien, otherwise eligible for suspension of deportation, was held to have established the required good moral character during the preceding 5 year period notwithstanding one isolated incident during the 5 year period which might possibly indicate a lapse from good moral character, the record as a whole being favorable to him in regard to good moral conduct.
CHARGE:
Warrant: Act of 1924 — No immigration visa.
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: The evidence establishes that the respondent is a native and citizen of Italy, aged 34, who last entered the United States at the port of New York November 26, 1927, as a stowaway aboard the S.S. Lesonna. At the time of last entry the respondent intended to remain in the United States permanently. He was not in possession of an immigration visa.
Findings of Fact: Upon the basis of all the evidence presented, it is found:
(1) That the respondent is an alien, native and citizen of Italy;
(2) That the respondent entered the United States at the Port of New York on November 26, 1927, as a stowaway aboard the S.S. Lesonna;
(3) That the respondent intended to remain in the United States permanently;
(4) That the respondent was not in possession of an immigration visa at the time of entry.Conclusions of Law: Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, it is concluded:
(1) That under sections 13 and 14 of the Immigration Act of 1924, the respondent is subject to deportation on the ground that at the time of his entry he was an immigrant not in possession of an immigration visa and not exempted from the presentation thereof by said act or regulations made thereunder;
(2) That under section 20 of the Immigration Act of 1917, the respondent is deportable to Italy at Government expense.Factors Relating to Suspension of Deportation: Respondent has formally applied for suspension of deportation pursuant to section 19 (c) (2) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended. The Presiding Inspector has recommended deportation. The Commissioner has ordered that the application for suspension be denied and granted the respondent voluntary departure in lieu of deportation within 6 months with the additional privilege of preexamination.
Respondent was married on September 22, 1935, to a native-born citizen of the United States. Of this union there are three minor American-born children. His wife, who is unemployed, and the children are wholly dependent upon him for support. He is employed as a longshoreman at a salary of $60 weekly. He has assets valued at $1,250.
That the respondent's deportation would result in serious economic detriment to his wife and children, all citizens of the United States, is clear. However, the adverse action recommended by the Commissioner is based on the respondent's testimony to the effect that during February of 1945 he was charged with allegedly taking two raincoats from a ship upon which he was employed. He denied he intended to keep the merchandise for his own use, stating that he saw the raincoats on the deck of the vessel he was loading and merely intended to place them on a pier. In a statement he made to the customs authorities when the incident occurred he indicated that since the raincoats appeared to be good ones he thought he would take them home. The report of the customs authorities indicates that the articles were identified as part of the lend-lease cargo. As a result of the foregoing, the respondent was assessed a penalty by the Customs Service of $16 for violation of section 453 of the Tariff Act of 1930. There was no prosecution. Moreover, the respondent is not deportable because of that incident. It should be noted that there is no evidence in the record that the respondent was guilty of theft or that the fine of $16 which was assessed against him was due to stealing. Neither does the respondent admit the commission of theft. While it does appear that the fine was assessed because of possible defrauding of the Government by the respondent in violation of the tariff laws, it does seem that the incident was not considered of a serious nature. It is not felt, therefore, that that one isolated incident should preclude him from suspension of deportation on the record as a whole. He has had long residence here, and his wife and three minor children, all citizens of the United States are dependent upon him. The records of the Federal Bureau of Investigation contain no adverse opinion, nor do those of the Alien Enemy Control Unit.
An independent character investigation conducted by the Service establishes that he has been a person of good moral character for the past 5 years, which is substantiated by sworn statements of persons well acquainted with him. In addition he has submitted letters of recommendation from several of his employers, and all appear favorable to the respondent. As already stated, he is not deportable under any provision of section 19 (d) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended. He is of the white race and not ineligible to naturalization. It is felt that the application for suspension of deportation should be granted.
Suspension of Deportation: Findings of fact: Upon the basis of all the evidence presented, it is found:
(1) That the alien is a person of the white race and is eligible for naturalization in the United States;
(2) That the alien has been of good moral character for the preceding 5 years;
(3) That deportation of the alien would result in serious economic detriment to his wife and minor children, all of whom are citizens of the United States;
(4) That after full inquiry, no facts have been developed which would indicate that the alien is deportable under any of the provisions of law specified in section 19 (d) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended.Suspension of Deportation: Conclusion of law: Upon the basis of the findings of fact, it is concluded:
(1) That the alien is eligible for a suspension of deportation under the provisions of section 19 (c) (2) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended.Order: It is ordered that deportation of the alien be suspended under the provisions of section 19 (c) (2) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended.
It is further ordered, That if Congress takes no action adverse to the order granting suspension of deportation, and when the required fee is paid, proceedings be canceled.
As the case involves suspension of deportation of an alien pursuant to the provisions of section 19 (c) (2) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended, in accordance with the provisions of title 8, section 90.12, Code of Federal Regulations, the Board refers the case to the Attorney General for review of its decision.
The findings of fact, conclusions of law and order of the Board of Immigration Appeals suspending the deportation of respondent under the provisions of section 19 (c) of the Immigration Act of 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and adopted.