Interim Decision #1258 

Mawr= OF CASSISI 

In DEPORTATION Proceedings 

A-10202132 

Decided by Board <7 altuary 15,1983 

Recourse may not be had to the remarks of the State's Attorney to the court at 

the time of sentencing in order to determine whether or not the crime involves 

moral turpitude where respondent was convicted under a broad, divisible 

statute which enumerates several nets, the commission of which may or may 

not involve moral turpitude, and the record of conviction merely refers to the 

section of law involved. 

CHARGE 

Order : Act of 1952--Section 241(a) (4) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (4) 3—Crime involving moral turpitude committed within five 

years—Sentenced to confinement a year or more—Encouraging abortion (Conn. 1959). 

The case comes forward on appeal by the trial attorney from the 

order of the special inquiry officer dated September 26, 1962 ordering 

that the proceedings be terminated. 

The record relates to a, native and citizen of Italy, 27 years of old, 

male, who last entered the United States at the port of New York on 

December 1, 1955 when he was admitted for permanent residence. On 

April 14, 1959 he was convicted in the Superior Court, New Haven, 

Connecticut of the offense of Encouraging the Commission of Abortion in violation of section 53-31 of the General Statutes of Connecticut and was sentenced to confinement in jail for a period of one 

year, execution of sentence suspended, and placed on probation for 

2 years. 

The record of conviction discloses that the respondent was first 

charged with violation of section 53-29 of the General Statutes of 

Connecticut, "Attempt to Procure Miscarriage". He entered. a plea 

of not guilty to that charge. Thereafter, the State's Attorney, with 

consent of the court, filed a substituted information charging the respondent with violation of section 53-31 of the General Statutes of 

Connecticut, "Encouraging Abortion". The substituted information 

merely states that on February 21, 1959 the respondent and another 

136 
Interim Decision #1258 

person, Carmen Coscia, did violate section 53-31 of the General Statutes. There is no further description or specification of the acts 

committed. The respondent pleaded guilty to the substituted information on Apri114,1959. 

The section of law under which the respondent was convicted, section 53-31 of the General Statutes of Connecticut, is entitled "Encouraging the Commission of Abortion" and provides: 

Any person who, by publication, lecture or otherwise or by advertisement or by 

sale or circulation of any publication, encourages or prompts to the commission of 

the offenses described in sections 53-29 [Attempt to Procure Miscarriage] or 

53-30 [Abortion or Miscarriage] who sells or advertises medicines or instruments or other devices for the commission of any of said offenses, except to a 

Itopngpg1 physician or to a hospital approved by the State Department of Health, 

or who advertises any so-called monthly regulator for women, shall be tined not 

more than $500 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both. 

It is noted that the section of law of which the respondent was convicted is a broad, divisible statute which enumerates several wits, the 

commission of which may or may not involve moral turpitude. The 

record of conviction, which includes the charge (information or indictment), plea, verdict and sentence, does not throw any light upon 

the nature of the crime committed inasmuch as the substituted information merely charged the commission of the crime by reference to 

the section of the law involved. The trial attorney urges that recourse 

may be had to'the remarks of the State's Attorney to the court at the 

time of sentencing but we concur with the special inquiry officer that 

the established authority is to the contrary. 

We do not believe that the case of Marinelli v. Ryarb 2 assists the 

Service. In that case, while the record before the criminal court did 

not contain a copy of the "information", the court remarked that the 

substance of the information appeared in the judgment of that court 

and from the counts specified in the judgment the court was able to 

determine that the crime involved moral turpitude. The appellate 

court found it unnecessary to reconsider what it had laid down in 

United States ex rel. Zaffarano v. Corsi, 63 F.2d 757; i.e., that in 

reviewing an order of deportation, the court may not look beyond the 

indictment, the plea, the verdict and the sentence and, therefore, 

the question did not arise as to whether the evidence before the court 

that sentenced the alien might be examined to ascertain whether the 

sentence brought him within the deportation statute. 

The special inquiry officer has noted that in the case of the co-defendant of this respondent, who was convicted of the same offense, the 

Attains v. UM, 210 Fed. 860 (2d Cir., 1914) ; United States en rel. Robinson 

v. _Dam 51 F_2(1_ 1022 (2d Cir., 1931) ; United ,States en rel. Zaffarano v. Corsi, 63 

F2d 757 (2d Cir., 1933). 

2 285 F.2d 474 (2d Cir., 1961). 

137 
Interim Decision 4t1258 

proceedings were terminated upon. a finding that upon the record the 

Service had failed to bear its burden of establishing that the respondent was deportable by evidence which was reasonable, substantial and 

probative.s We concur with the conclusion of the special inquiry 

officer in the instant case that from the record of conviction it is not 

possible to establish that the crime of which respondent was convicted 

necessarily involves moral turpitude. The special inquiry officer 

properly terminated the proceedings. The appeal of the trial attorney 

willbe dismissed. 

ORDER: It is ordered that the appeal by the trial attorney from 

the special inquiry officer's decision of September 26, 1962 terminating 

the proceedings be and the same is hereby dismissed. 

3 Matter of 0—, A-10029078 (May 1, 1992). 

138