Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Walter Keay FRASER, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1955-02-16
Citations: 219 F.2d 844
Docket Number: No. 13985
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Walter Keay FRASER, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 219
Pages: 844–847

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Walter Keay FRASER, Appellee.
No. 13985.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Feb. 16, 1955.
Lloyd H. Burke, U. S. Atty., Charles Elmer Collett, Asst. U. S. Atty., Milton T. Simmons, Acting District Counsel, Immigration & Naturalization Service, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Walter Keay Fraser, in pro. per.
Before HEALY, BONE, and POPE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
HEALY, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal by the United States from an order of the district court admitting appellee to citizenship. In so ordering the court disapproved of a contrary recommendation which had been made by the examiner.
It appears from the examiner's report that in November of 1951, immediately preceding the filing of appellee's petition for naturalization, he had testified and had executed a sworn arrest affidavit wherein he stated that he had been arrested, fined, convicted, and put in jail as follows: "July 4, 1939, Los Angeles, California; drunk; 5 days." During the course of an investigation conducted subsequently it was learned that appellee had had the following additional drunk arrests to his credit: "December 31, 1930 — PD, Pasadena, California, intoxication and St. 121 and W4-4 — -fined $25.00 or ten days, 30 days and license suspended 90 days. February 7,1941 — PD, Los Angeles, California, drunk- — no disposition. March 25, 1941 —PD, Pasadena, California, intoxication — $10.00 or five days. May 19, 1943 —SO, Modesto, California, drunk; five days work gang, fifteen days suspension."
At a further preliminary examination conducted in May of 1952 appellee admitted the additional arrests listed.
The record discloses that appellee was born in Dundee, Scotland, in 1893. In 1910 he lawfully entered the United States for permanent residence and has never since been elsewhere. He has a grown son, born in Illinois of his first wife, who died in 1924. In 1950 he married a second time, his wife being a citizen by birth. He and his wife live together in San Francisco. He is by occupation a machinist's helper.
The government disclaims any contention that the offenses for which appel-lee was arrested are of such a nature as to preclude a finding of good moral character. Admittedly they were minor slips of no consequence in themselves, and they occurred many years before the naturalization proceedings were begun. What is argued is that .the failure to disclose them when questioned under oath amounts to knowing and willful concealment precluding a finding of good moral character. Among others, our decision in Del Guercio v. Pupko, 9 Cir., 160 F.2d 799, is cited as a case in point and as controlling here.
In the present instance the court interrogated appellee orally and inquired sharply into his answer to the arrest question. His reply was "Well, the record you have there, five arrests, they told me to answer what time but I couldn't tell when it was. I don't think it was even that. Instead of putting the word 'several' they put that."
The district judge was no doubt familiar with the holding in Pupko, supra, and with the principles applicable in such cases. He saw and heard the applicant for citizenship and, unlike ourselves, had opportunity to observe his demeanor and to gauge his sincerity and truthfulness. He appears to have concluded from the reply given to his question that the applicant had not purposely withheld information from the Service, but that the examiner's report did not adequately reflect what' was said. We are not disposed to overrule the implied finding, and accordingly the order below is affirmed.