Nagle

Chin Ching v. Nagle

Good Law
51 F.2d 64·1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 2865
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 25, 1931No. 6426California637 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sure, J.

■ Chin Ching, a male Chinese, bom on April 22, 1909, arrived in San Francisco on May 28, 1980, and applied for admission into the United States on the ground that he is the foreign-bom son of Chin Kim, a native-born citizen. His application was denied by the Board of Special Inquiry on the ground that the relationship was not established, and upon appeal this excluding decision was affirmed by the Secretary of Labor. Application was then made to the District Court for a writ of habeas corpus, and froip the order denying same this appeal is taken. The sole question before us is whether or not the applicant had a fair hearing.

Under the provisions of the statute the decision of a Board of Special Inquiry is final unless reversed on appeal to the Secretary of Labor. It is only to be reviewed on habeas corpus when the administrative officers have manifestly abused the power and discretion conferred upon them. Tulsidas v. Insular Collector, 262 U. S. 258, 263 , 43 S. Ct. 586, 588 , 67 L. Ed. 969 . It is not the function of an appellate court in a habeas corpus proceeding to weigh the evidence or to go into the sufficiency of the probative facts. White v. Young Yen (C. C. A.) 278 F.…

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.