Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

habeas corpusdeportationsustained
habeas corpusdeportationsustained

Related Cases

Lopez-Alegria v. Ilchert
View Case »
Noorani v. Smith
View Case »
Kellici v. Gonzales
View Case »
Si v. Slattery
View Case »
Romero v. Reno
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

U.S. ex rel. Fontan v. Uhl

Facts

An order for relator's deportation was issued following his conviction in Algeria for not paying for his ship passage from Marseille. The government claimed this conviction involved moral turpitude, making him subject to deportation. The relator denied the allegations and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the government, which consisted solely of a communication from the French Minister of Foreign Affairs regarding his prior convictions.

An order for relator's deportation was issued following his conviction in Algeria for not paying for his ship passage from Marseille. The government claimed this conviction involved moral turpitude, making him subject to deportation. The relator denied the allegations and challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the government, which consisted solely of a communication from the French Minister of Foreign Affairs regarding his prior convictions.

Issue

Whether the relator's conviction for not paying for ship passage constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude, thereby justifying his deportation.

Whether the relator's conviction for not paying for ship passage constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude, thereby justifying his deportation.

Rule

Under 8 U.S.C.S. 155, an alien can be deported for crimes involving moral turpitude, which is defined as acts of baseness, vileness, or depravity contrary to accepted rules.

Under 8 U.S.C.S. 155, an alien can be deported for crimes involving moral turpitude, which is defined as acts of baseness, vileness, or depravity contrary to accepted rules.

Analysis

The court analyzed the nature of the relator's conviction, noting that while the French government labeled it as robbery, the act of not paying for passage is more accurately described as being a stowaway in the U.S. context. The court concluded that this conduct does not involve moral turpitude as defined by U.S. law, since there was no evidence of larceny or theft associated with the failure to pay.

The court analyzed the nature of the relator's conviction, noting that while the French government labeled it as robbery, the act of not paying for passage is more accurately described as being a stowaway in the U.S. context. The court concluded that this conduct does not involve moral turpitude as defined by U.S. law, since there was no evidence of larceny or theft associated with the failure to pay.

Conclusion

The court sustained the writ of habeas corpus and discharged the relator, ruling that he could not be deported based on the conviction in question.

The court sustained the writ of habeas corpus and discharged the relator, ruling that he could not be deported based on the conviction in question.

Who won?

Relator prevailed in the case because the court found that the evidence presented by the government was insufficient to warrant deportation, and the nature of the offense did not involve moral turpitude.

Relator prevailed in the case because the court found that the evidence presented by the government was insufficient to warrant deportation, and the nature of the offense did not involve moral turpitude.

You must be