Opinion ID: 67074
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: In December 2003, an immigration judge ordered Jang's deportation from the United States based on two Texas convictions. After exhausting various appeals, Jang repeatedly failed to complete a visa application to South Korea. Based on this conduct, the government indicted Jang under 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a)(1)(B), which forbids an alien under a final order of removal from wilfully failing or refusing to complete documents necessary to ensure his departure. After a jury returned a guilty verdict, the district court sentenced Jang to thirty three months' imprisonment, followed by a two year term of supervised release. The district court imposed the following special condition of release: [t]he defendant shall comply with all immigration regulations and laws including all administrative procedures to effect the successful removal of the defendant from the United States, which includes signing the INS Form I-229 and completing a Korean Visa application. As with all individuals on supervised release, Jang was also subject to the mandatory condition prohibiting him from committing another federal, state, or local crime. In June of 2007, Jang was released from prison to the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). He again refused to complete the documents necessary to ensure his deportation. As a result, Jang's probation officer filed a Petition for Offender Under Supervision with the district court. Following his arrest, Jang appeared before the district court, promising to sign a Korean visa application. He told the district court that he would rather be free in Korea than incarcerated in the United States. Consequently, the district court allowed Jang's supervised release to continue. After the hearing, Jang, as promised, completed the Korean visa application and signed the INS Form I-229. In addition, Korea requires that its citizens repatriate on a voluntary basis. The country determines whether a citizen's repatriation is voluntary via an interview conducted by a Korean consulate. If the consulate determines that the individual desires to return, a travel certificate is issued. Jang's interview with the consulate was conducted in private over the phone. After the interview, the Korean consulate sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, stating: We have difficulties issuing the T/C [Travel Certificate]. The important factors we consider before issuing a T/C are the deportee's willingness to go back to Korea and pending legal processes if any. We have direct contact with a deportee, when we receive the T/C request from an Immigration Office, to make sure if a) he wants to return to Korea and the signature on the application for the T/C was made with his own will and if b) he is going to appeal for the case. We issue T/C's when the above mentioned requirements are clarified. During my conversation with Mr. Jang, he told me his signature was not made voluntarily and he didn't want to return to Korea. He also expressed his strong will to appeal to the court of Texas for his case. With the above reasons, the Korean Consulate General won't be able to issue a T/C for Mr. Jang. After receiving this letter, Jang's probation officer filed another Petition for Offender Under Supervision. The petition alleged that Jang's answers to the Korean consulate's questions violated the aforementioned special and mandatory conditions of his release. At the subsequent revocation hearing, the government offered the Korean consulate's letter as evidence and called ICE agent James Smith to testify. Agent Smith testified that Jang's answers to the questions posed by the Korean consulate violated the special condition of his release. As to the mandatory condition of release, Agent Smith testified that Jang's answers violated 8 U.S.C. § 1253, although he did not specify the particular subsection implicated. Jang offered no evidence in rebuttal. Based on this testimony, the district court revoked Jang's supervised release, stating I don't think you [Jang] have any intention of abiding by any of the orders of anybody. And sobeit [sic so be it]. The district court sentenced Jang to twenty-four months in prison plus an additional year of supervised release. When Jang objected to his sentence of twenty-four months' imprisonment as unreasonable, the district court stated: I think it's a reasonable sentence because Mr. Jang continues to confuse his desire to stay in the United States with his voluntariness to leave at this time. And those are different things. And he's simply toying with the court and with the INS and everybody else. And I think this is the only way to get his attention is to do this. I think its's a reasonable sentence. I just thinkthere's got to be something done to wake Mr. Jang up. And we will see if going to the penitentiary again will do that. And I think that may be part of the case. If not, and he wants to spend his time in the penitentiary, he certainly deserves the punishment. This appealed followed.