Pierre Freund v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

5 F.3d 536 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Pierre FREUND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-16756. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 30, 1993. * Decided Sept. 8, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, D.C. No. CR-92-03167-FMS; Fern M. Smith, District Judge Presiding. N.D.Cal. AFFIRMED. Before: REAVLEY, ** PREGERSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM *** 2 Appellant Pierre Freund argues that the district court erred in denying his habeas petition and affirming the exclusion order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) because: 1) the law entitles Freund to a deportation hearing rather than an exclusion hearing; and 2) the evidence adduced in Freund's plenary exclusion hearing does not support the BIA's decision that Freund abandoned his permanent resident status. 1. DEPORTATION V. EXCLUSION 3 Freund applied…