Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive
Search
Yahoo! News
Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Nicanor P. Penalosa, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 468 F.2d 198
Oct. 5, 1972
Bernard Cooper, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
William D. Keller, U. S. Atty., John E. Nordin, Frederick M. Brosio, Jr., Asst. U. S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., Stephen Suffin, Atty., I&NS, San Francisco, Cal., Joseph Surreck, Atty., I&NS, San Pedro, Cal., George K. Rosenberg, Dist. Director, I&NS, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Before KOELSCH, HUFSTEDLER, and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Petition to review a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Special Inquiry Officer's determination that petitioner is deportable and should be denied permission to depart voluntarily from the United States at his own expense in lieu of deportation. Section 244(e), Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1254(e).
The sole question is whether the denial of the requested relief constituted an abuse of discretion.1 The answer is plainly "no." The record indicates, and the Special Inquiry Officer specifically found, that petitioner, at various times during his sojourn in this country, made material misrepresentations of fact to the immigration authorities with respect to matters relevant to his continuing visitorial status. Fernandez-Gonzalez v. I. N. S., 347 F.2d 737 (7th Cir. 1965).
Affirmed. The mandate will issue forthwith.
That petitioner may have recently initiated some other proceeding before the Immigration Service is irrelevant to the issue on this appeal. Armstrong v. I. N. C., 445 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1971)