Proctor

Yee Soo Hing v. Proctor

Good Law
86 F.2d 397·1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 9, 1936No. 8292California570 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Appellant appeals from an order denying his application for a writ of habeas corpus. He claims to have been born in China and to be the son of a Chinese person who is a citizen of the United States by reason of his birth in'the United States. The immigration authorities rejected his claim and the evidence in support of it upon the ground that the discrepancies in the testimony of the appellant and of his witnesses showed that the testimony was untrustworthy. The findings of the Department of Labor are set out in the findings of the Board of Review. The discrepancies relate to the date of birth of the appellant.

The appellant states that he was born January 16, 1904, and was the third son of his alleged father, Yee Ho On. In February, 1909, the alleged father first gave the name of the appellant as one of his sons. On February 1, 1909, two alleged older brothers of the appellant applied for admission to the United States at San Francisco. They then testified that Yee Sue Choon was the third of their father’s. children, aged seven, attending school in China, and that the fourth son was Yee Sue Hing, aged two years. In the same year at El Paso, Tex., the alleged father, on February…

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.