Ex parte Nakazo Matsuda

Good Law
3 F. Supp. 155·1933 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1569
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1933No. 10740California624 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Cosgrave, J.

Habeas corpus to the immigration authorities in behalf of Nakazo Matsuda and Risa Matsuda, husband and wife.

Since 1893 both petitioners, laborers and natives of Japan, have been domiciled in Hawaii. In 1916 they left Hawaii, visited Japan, and returned after an absence of seven months. They were readmitted at Honolulu by the United States immigration service as returning residents on Japanese passports limited to'Hawaii.

In 1929 they sought to come to continental United States to reside permanently. This application was denied, and they were allowed to come as temporary visitors only under section 3 of the Immigration Act of 1917 (8 USCA § 136). Overstaying the six months’ period allowed, they were taken into custody and a hearing had, and on September . 26, 1931 the Commissioner General of Immigration directed that petitioners might depart voluntarily on or before October 2.7, 1931, or in default thereof be deported. Warrant was issued on November 3d thereafter on the ground that petitioners had been found in the United States in violation of the Immigration Act of 1917. Application was thereupon made for writ of habeas corpus, and the matter is before the court.

Petitioners…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.