A-5981027 (56170/505)
Decided by the Board May 12, 1944.
Admission of Crime — Theft — Juvenile Delinquency — California.
An admission of the commission of "theft" in a State jurisdiction (California), where the offense is considered to be an act of juvenile delinquency because of the age of the offender, is merely an admission of juvenile delinquency for which the alien is not deportable.
CHARGES:
Warrant: Act of 1924 — Immigrant without immigration visa.
Act of 1917 — Entry at place other than designated.
Passport Act and Act of 1917 — No passport.
Act of 1940 — No visa, reentry permit, or border crossing identification card.
Lodged: Act of 1917 — Admits commission of crime prior to entry, to wit: Theft.
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: This record relates to a native and citizen of Mexico who last entered the United States about 3 miles east of San Ysidro, Calif., at nighttime, on or about October 15, 1943. The respondent testified that at the time of his entry, he intended to work in the United States and live here permanently; that he was not in possession of an immigration visa; that he did not enter at a regular designated port for aliens; that he did not present an unexpired passport showing his origin or identity, permit, or border crossing identification card.
The respondent testified that he was legally admitted to the United States for permanent residence at El Paso, Tex., on December 27, 1922, with members of his family, and was readmitted at the same port on August 29, 1930, after a visit to Mexico. The respondent and his family returned to Mexico in 1930, and he remained there until the date of his last entry. At the hearing the respondent testified that in 1928 or 1929, when he was 15 years of age, he committed the crime of theft; that he stole some candy or cigarettes valued at about $1, and that he pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 30 days in jail at Martinez, Calif. He further testified that he did not know whether he served sentence in jail or in a reform school; but that he believed that most of the boys there were under 21 years of age. He admitted that he was guilty of the commission, prior to entry, of a crime involving moral turpitude, to wit: theft; and that it was "a foolish kid trick."
A record of judgment and conviction for the alleged crime could not be obtained. The charge was lodged against the alien that he is in the United States in violation of the Act of 1917 in that he admits the commission prior to entry of a crime involving moral turpitude, to wit: theft.
The charge that the respondent admits the commission of a crime involving moral turpitude cannot be sustained. The California Juvenile Court Law (General Laws of California, title 290, act 3966, section 6-approved June 5, 1915), in effect at the time the respondent committed the offense in question, provides that the Juvenile Court have jurisdiction of persons under the age of 18 years. Since the respondent was only about 15 years of age at the time of the theft, at most, he could only have been found guilty of an act of juvenile delinquency. It therefore follows that the admission of the offense contained in the record was not admission of a crime, but an admission of juvenile delinquency for which he would not be deportable ( In re: A---- A----, 56038/313, August 7, 1943).
Findings of Fact: Upon the basis of all the evidence presented, it is found:
(1) That the respondent is an alien, a native and citizen of Mexico;
(2) That the respondent last entered the United States at a place about three miles east of the port of San Ysidro, Calif., on or about October 15, 1943;
(3) That, at the time of entry, the respondent intended to work and live permanently in the United States;
(4) That, at the time of entry, the respondent was not in possession of a valid immigration visa;
(5) That the respondent does not admit the commission of theft prior to entry into the United States;
(6) That at the time of entry the respondent did not present an unexpired passport or official document in the nature of a passport, a valid visa, reentry permit or border crossing identification card;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 May 26, 1924, the respondent is subject to deportation on the ground that at the time of entry he was an immigrant not in possession of a valid immigration visa and not exempt from the presentation thereof by the said Act or regulations made thereunder;
(2) That under section 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of 1917, the respondent is subject to deportation on the ground that he entered by land at a place other than a designated port of entry for aliens;
(3) That under the Passport Act approved May 22, 1918, as amended, and section 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended, the respondent is subject to deportation on the ground that at the time of entry he did not present an unexpired passport or official document in the nature of a passport issued by the government of the country to which he owes allegiance, or other travel document showing his origin and identity, as required by Executive order in effect at time of entry;
(4) That under the act of June 28, 1940, and section 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended, the respondent is subject to deportation on the ground that at the time of entry he did not present a valid visa and not being exempt from so doing as an emergency case as defined by the Secretary of State, a reentry permit, or border-crossing identification card, as required by section 30 of title III of said act;
(5) That under section 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of 1917, the respondent is not subject to deportation on the ground that he admits having committed a felony or other crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude prior to entry into the United States, to wit: theft;
(6) That under section 20 of the Immigration Act of 1917, the respondent is deportable to Mexico, at Government expense.Other Factors: The respondent is married to a native and citizen of Mexico who resides with his parents in that country. He declined to submit application for voluntary departure in lieu of deportation.
Order: It is ordered that the alien be deported to Mexico on the charges contained in the warrant of arrest.