Hose

Hose v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Bad Law
180 F.3d 992·99 Daily Journal DAR 5820·1999 WL 374070·1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 11930·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4536
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 10, 1999No. 97-15789California2,027 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thomas, J.

Tardía Tagalicud Hose appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing her habeas corpus petition for lack of jurisdiction. We agree that Hose’s claims are not subject to judicial review, albeit for different reasons than those provided by the district court.

I

Hose, a Philippine citizen, had obtained approval for a visa based on her marriage to a United States citizen. Upon arrival in Hawaii, she was inspected by an official of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) and allowed to enter the United States as an immediate relative of a United States citizen. While she was waiting to clear customs, she was detained and her visa was canceled for suspicion of marriage fraud. The INS subsequently initiated exclusion proceedings, alleging that Hose was excludable pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(7)(A)(i)(I) for being an alien without a proper visa.

After several continuances, an exclusion hearing was held. Because of pending criminal charges, Hose asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and declined to testify. The immigration judge determined that Hose had failed to sustain her burden of proof of establishing that she was…

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.