GIN SOON GING
v.
CARMICHAEL, DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

9th Cir. | 1941-10-28
No. 9826
Before DENMAN, MATHEWS, and STEPHENS, Circuit Judges.
123 F.2d 72 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1941) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the appellant was not denied a fair hearing by the Immigration Service, and the Board of Special Inquiry's decision was binding.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant, claiming to be the son of a U.S. born Chinese citizen, was denied admission to the United States. He applied for a writ of habeas corpus, c…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
DENMAN, Circuit Judge.

DENMAN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court dismissing a writ of habeas corpus issued upon the application of the appellant, a person of the Chinese race claiming to be the son of an United States born Chinese, but denied admission to the United States. Appellant contends that he was denied a fair hearing before the Immigration Service.

We are unable to find that a fair hearing was denied. The inferences to be drawn from the demeanor of the witnesses is peculiarly within the functions of the Board of Special Inquiry. A witness’ words may completely support a burden of proof yet, when confronted with prior statements, his demeanor may be such as not to warrant belief in any of them. Allan v. United States, 9 Cir., 115 F. 2d 804. Here there was a conflict of testimony regarding such an intimate family matter as the birth or non-birth of a child of applicant’s brother and, if born, whether a boy or a girl. The demeanor of the claimed father of the applicant and the applicant in testifying regarding these contradictions may afford inferences as to veracity or the contrary which, coupled with the contradictions, make binding on this court the Board’s decision that the burden of proof of citizenship has not been maintained.

The contradictions are properly shown, though they are between statements in the instant proceeding and in an unsuccessful prior proceeding to secure admission for appellant’s brother. Soo Hoo Yen v. Tillinghast, 1 Cir., 24 F. 2d 163; United States ex rel. Ng Kee Wong v. Corsi, 2 Cir., 65 F. 2d 564; Ex parte Wong Foo Gwong, 9 Cir., 50 F. 2d 360.

Order affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw