Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 (1947). · Go Syfert
Search
Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 (1947). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 6× by 4 distinct cases, 1980–2014 · 4 courts→ Stable · …deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. ✓
cited 6× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2004 · …deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the alien who has acquired his residence here. ⚠ not in text
cited 6× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1996↓ Fading · …the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the alien who has acquired his residence here. ✓
550 citation events (163 in the last 25 years) across 52 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. MICFO, LLC (ca4, 2025-08-25)
Treatment trajectory · 1947 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1947 1986 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United States v. MICFO, LLC
4th Cir. · 2025 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the noncitizen who has acquired his residence here.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United States v. Amir Golestan
4th Cir. · 2025 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the noncitizen who has acquired his residence here.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United States v. MICFO, LLC
4th Cir. · 2025 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the noncitizen who has acquired his residence here.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) United States v. Amir Golestan
4th Cir. · 2025 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the noncitizen who has acquired his residence here.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Ex Parte Martin Guadalupe Campos Leal (3×)
Tex. App. · 2014 · quote attribution · 3 verbatim quotes · confidence low
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Nevio Restrepo v. Edward McElroy Interim Field Office Director for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, New York (6×)
2d Cir. · 2004 · quote attribution · 6 verbatim quotes · confidence low
deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the alien who has acquired his residence here.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Myrisia Franklin v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (6×)
8th Cir. · 1996 · quote attribution · 6 verbatim quotes · confidence low
the stakes are indeed high and momentous for the alien who has acquired his residence here.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Farhane v. United States
2d Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
As the Supreme Court has recognized, “denaturalization, like deportation, may result in the loss of all that makes life worth living.” Knauer v. United States, 328 U.S. 654, 659 (1946) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Klapprott, 335 U.S. at 612 (characterizing the loss of citizenship as “an extraordinarily severe penalty,” one that cannot compare to “a mere money fine or a short imprisonment”); Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947) (describing deportation as “the equivalent of banishment or exile”); Schneiderman v. United States, 320 U.S. 118, 122 (1943…
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Salvador Diaz
2d Cir. · 2020 · confidence medium
Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Mebuin
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Since deportation is a serious consequence, "the equivalent of banishment or exile" ( Delgadillo v Carmichael , 332 US 388, 391 [1947]), we have recognized that a noncitizen defendant may be willing to forgo an otherwise "very beneficial deal" if it carries the consequence of deportation ( see Samuels, 143 AD3d at 403 [internal quotation marks omitted]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sifuentes
Colo. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947); Sandoval, 249 P.3d at 1022 . ¶ 43 With all this in mind, we must decide not “whether a decision to reject a plea of guilty was the best choice, but only whether it [was] a rational one.” Picca, 947 N.Y.S.2d at 130 (discussing Padilla standard).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Commonwealth v. Sylvester
Mass. · 2016 · confidence medium
The Court recognized that deportation is a ‘“particularly severe” penalty, because it is ‘“the equivalent of banishment or exile.” Padilla, 559 U.S. at 365, 373 , quoting Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-391 (1947).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Stephen LeMere (2×)
Wis. · 2016 · confidence medium
Most collateral consequences do not amount to "the equivalent of banishment or exile." Id. at 373 (quoting Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Innocent Batamula
5th Cir. · 2016 · confidence medium
See 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(A)(ii) (“Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of two or more crimes involving 12 Case: 12-20630 Document: 00513490574 Page: 13 Date Filed: 05/03/2016 No. 12-20630 plea bargain is a critical phase of litigation for purposes of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel” and recognized that “[t]he severity of deportation—‘the equivalent of banishment or exile’—only underscores how critical it is for counsel to inform her noncitizen client that he faces a risk of deportation.” Id. at 373-74 (quoting Delgadillo v. Carm…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Larry E. Johnson v. State of Missouri
Mo. Ct. App. · 2014 · confidence medium
Instead, Padilla involves the “unique” sanction of deportation as a result of a guilty plea, id. at 365 , a consequence which Padilla states is “„the equivalent of banishment or exile.‟” Id. at 373 (quoting Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 (1947)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. McDonald, J.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2014 · confidence medium
S50011/14 that, although civil in nature, “deportation is nevertheless intimately related to the criminal process” (id. at 1481), and concluded that “The severity of deportation -- ‘the equivalent of banishment or exile,’ -- only underscores how critical it is for counsel to inform her noncitizen client that he faces a risk of deportation.” Id. at 1486, quoting Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-391 (1947) (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Picoa
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, removal from the United States is a unique consequence of a criminal conviction (see Padilla v Kentucky, 559 US at —, 130 S Ct at 1482 ). “[T]he equivalent of banishment or exile” (Delgadillo v Carmichael, 332 US 388, 391 [1947]), it is “a particularly severe penalty” (Padilla v Kentucky, 559 US at —, 130 S Ct at 1481 [internal quotation marks omitted]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Picoa
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, removal from the United States is a unique consequence of a criminal conviction (see Padilla v Kentucky, 559 US at —, 130 S Ct at 1482 ). “[T]he equivalent of banishment or exile” (Delgadillo v Carmichael, 332 US 388, 391 [1947]), it is “a particularly severe penalty” (Padilla v Kentucky, 559 US at —, 130 S Ct at 1481 [internal quotation marks omitted]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Heriberto Suarez v. State of Indiana
Ind. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Moreover, it should be noted that deportation can be a very serious penal consequence, with the United States Supreme Court recognizing that it is, at least in some 6 cases, “‘the equivalent of banishment or exile[.]’”2 Padilla v. Kentucky, ––– U.S. –––, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 1486 (2010) (quoting Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-391 (1947)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Judulang v. Holder
SCOTUS · 2011 · confidence medium
In a foundational deportation case, this Court recognized the high stakes for an alien who has long resided in this country, and reversed an agency decision that would “make his right to remain here dependent on circumstances so for­tuitous and capricious.” Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U. S. 388, 391 (1947).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Duarte v. Holder
2d Cir. · 2010 · confidence medium
"The stakes are indeed high and momentous," Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947), for "deportation is a drastic measure and at times the equivalent of banishment or exile." Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 10 (1948).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Duarte v. Holder
2d Cir. · 2010 · confidence medium
"The stakes are indeed high and momentous," Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947), for "deportation is a drastic measure and at times the equivalent of banishment or exile." Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 10 (1948).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Bennett
N.Y. City Crim. Ct. · 2010 · confidence medium
The majority in Padilla stated that its principal concern is to protect noncitizens from incompetent attorney representation facing the risk of deportation, a penalty equivalent to “banishment or exile” (559 US at —, 130 S Ct at 1486, quoting Delgadillo v Carmichael, 332 US 388, 391 [1947]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Padilla v. Kentucky (2×)
SCOTUS · 2010 · confidence medium
The severity of deportation — “the equivalent of banishment or exile,” Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U. S. 388, 390-391 (1947) — only underscores how critical it is for coun sel to inform her noncitizen client that he faces a risk of deportation. 15 V It is our responsibility under the Constitution to ensure that no criminal defendant — whether a citizen or not — is left to the “mercies of incompetent counsel.” Richardson, 397 U. S., at 771 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) PUENTE
BIA · 2002 · confidence medium
Id. at 10 (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. Cyr (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
SCOTUS · 2001 · confidence medium
This was implied in Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 U. S. 651 , relied on by the Government." Gegiow v. Uhl, 239 U. S. 3, 9 (1915). [29] See, e. g., Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U. S. 388, 391 (1947) (rejecting on habeas the Government's interpretation of the statutory term "entry"); Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U. S. 135, 149 (1945) (rejecting on habeas the Government's interpretation of the term "affiliation" with the Communist Party); Kessler v. Strecker, 307 U. S. 22, 35 (1939) (holding that "as the Secretary erred in the construction of the statute, the writ must be granted").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Deboris Calcano-Martinez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Sergio Madrid v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Fazila Khan v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
2d Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
See Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding, 344 U.S. 590, 596-600 (1953); Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath, 339 U.S. 33, 48-53 (1950); Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 9 (1948); Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 (1947); Kessler v. Strecker, 307 U.S. 22, 28-32 (1939); Mahler v. Eby, 264 U.S. 32, 45 (1924).
cited Cited as authority (rule) MENDOZA-SANDINO
BIA · 2000 · confidence medium
Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947); see also INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 449 (1987); Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 10 (1948).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Richardson v. INS
11th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Felker, 518 U.S. at 661 ; Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 (1947); Bridges v. Wilson, 326 U.S. 135, 149 (1945); Kessler v. Streckler, 307 U.S. 22, 35 (1939); Mahler v. Eby, 264 U.S. 32, 46 (1924); Gegiow v. Uhl, 239 U.S. 3 (1915); Gonzales v. Williams, 192 U.S. 1 (1904); The Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 U.S. 86 (1903); Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651 (1892).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Richardson v. INS
11th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Felker, 518 U.S. at 661 ; Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 (1947); Bridges v. Wilson, 326 U.S. 135, 149 (1945); Kessler v. Streckler, 307 U.S. 22, 35 (1939); Mahler v. Eby, 264 U.S. 32, 46 (1924); Gegiow v. Uhl, 239 U.S. 3 (1915); Gonzales v. Williams, 192 U.S. 1 (1904); The Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 U.S. 86 (1903); Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651 (1892).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) PUNU
BIA · 1998 · confidence medium
The courts have recognized that “[d]rastic consequences to the alien may result from a determination that he has been ‘convicted’ of a crime within the meaning of the Act.” Marino v. INS, supra, at 691 (citing Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947); Costello v. INS, 376 U.S. 120, 128 (1964)), As Chief Judge Kaufman stated in Lennon v. INS, 527 F.2d 187, 193 (2d Cir. 1975), “It is settled doctrine that deportation statutes must be construed in favor of the alien . . . [because Congress would not] trench on his freedom beyond that which is required by the narrowest 252 Inte…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Myrisia Franklin v. INS (2×)
8th Cir. · 1995 · confidence medium
But since the stakes are considerable for the individual, we will not assume that Congress meant to trench on [the alien's] freedom beyond that which is required by the narrowest of several possible meanings of the words used." Costello v. INS, 376 U.S. 120, 128 (1964) (quoting Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 10 (1948)); Rosenberg v. Fleuti, 374 U.S. 449, 458 (1963) ("the 'interests at stake' for the resident alien are 'momentous,'" citing Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947), and DiPasquale v. Karnuth, 158 F.2d 878, 879 (2d Cir. 1947)); Jordan v. DeGeorge, 341 U.S. 223, 231 …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) SANDOVAL
BIA · 1979 · confidence medium
Sperling v. Fitzpatrick, 426 F.2d 1161 (2 Cir. 1970) (rule not applied in parole revocation proceedings). " See Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 488 (1976); United States v. Janis, supra at 447-460 (1976); United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 349 (1974). " Deloadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 (1947).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Arturo Ascencio Mendez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 1977 · confidence medium
Respect for law does not thrive on captious interpretations.” Id. at 391 , 68 S.Ct. at 12 (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ioannis Georgios Kolios v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (2×)
1st Cir. · 1976 · confidence medium
Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 , 68 S.Ct. 10, 12 , 92 L.Ed. 17, 19 (1947) 2 As the majority correctly notes, had petitioner been convicted of a narcotics offense under federal law and dealt with under the Federal Youth Corrections Act (for which he would have been eligible, see 18 U.S.C. § 5006 (e)) he would not be deported following expunction
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ernest Francis v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
2d Cir. · 1976 · confidence medium
Although the right of a permanent resident alien to remain in this country has never been held to be the type of “fundamental right” which would subject classifications touching on it to strict judicial scrutiny, the Supreme Court has observed that “deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. . . . ” Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 , 68 S.Ct. 10, 12 , 92 L.Ed. 17, 19 (1947).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Joseph Rukavina v. The Immigration and Naturalization Service
7th Cir. · 1962 · confidence medium
That indictment charges that petitioner “unlawfully, fraudulently and feloniously did obtain * * * seven thousand dollars * * *." Petitioner relies on DiPasquale v. Karnuth, 2 Cir., 1947, 158 F.2d 878 and Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 1947, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 , to support his position that he was taken out of the United States against his will and hence cannot be said to have “entered” on his return.
discussed Cited "see" Luna Gutierrez v. Noem (2×)
D.D.C. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 , 389–91 (1947) (noncitizen’s ship sailing from Los Angeles to New York was torpedoed, and noncitizen was rescued and taken to Cuba; his return to the United States was not an entry); Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, 158 F.2d 878 , 878–79 (2d Cir. 1947) (noncitizen rode a train from Buffalo to Detroit, which he did not realize passed through Canada; his arrival in Detroit did not constitute an entry).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Burgos (2×)
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
Prejudice Furthermore, to satisfy Strickland’s prejudice requirement in the context of a claim of ineffective assistance in connection with a guilty plea, the defendant “must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” (Hill v Lockhart, 474 US 52, 59 [1985]; People v McDonald, 1 NY3d 109, 115 [2003].) Further, the “petitioner must convince the court that a decision to reject the plea bargain would have been rational under the circumstances.” (Padilla v Kentucky, 559 US at �…
discussed Cited "see" YANEZ
BIA · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Fong Haw Tan v. Phelan, 333 U.S. 6, 10 (1948) (recognizing that “deportation is a drastic measure and at times the equivalent of banishment or exile” (citing Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 (1947))); see also United States v. Pornes-Garcia, supra, at 146-47 (recognizing the Board’s “narrow” construction); Reyes-Hernandez v. INS, 89 F.3d 490, 492-93 (7th Cir. 1996) (recognizing the harsh consequences of deportation).
examined Cited "see" Sabino v. Reno (3×)
S.D. Tex. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10, 12 , 92 L.Ed. 17 (1947) (holding that alien’s return from Cuba was not an entry because merchant ship on which he was sailing was torpedoed by German submarine, resulting in alien being rescued and taken to Cuba temporarily).
examined Cited "see" Giuseppe Marino v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, United States Department of Justice (3×)
2d Cir. · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 391 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 (1947); Costello v. INS, 376 U.S. 120, 128 , 84 S.Ct. 580 , 11 L.Ed.2d 559 (1964).
examined Cited "see" Shaughnessy v. Oddo (3×)
2d Cir. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 1947, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 and Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, 2 Cir., 1947, 158 F.2d 878 ; Sec. 318, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1429 , eliminated the anomalous situation confronting the court in United States ex rel.
examined Cited "see" Barnes v. Oddo (3×)
2d Cir. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 1947, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 and Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, 2 Cir., 1947, 158 F.2d 878 ; Sec. 318, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1429 , eliminated the anomalous situations confronting the court in United States ex rel.
discussed Cited "see" In re Naturalization of Barandiaran (2×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1954 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 322 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 (1947) and Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, 158 F.2d 878 (2 Cir.1947).
examined Cited "see" Savoretti v. Voiler (3×)
5th Cir. · 1954 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 ; United States ex rel.
examined Cited "see" Savoretti v. United States Ex Rel. Pincus (3×)
5th Cir. · 1954 · signal: see · confidence high
See — Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 .
discussed Cited "see" Barber v. Gonzales (2×)
SCOTUS · 1954 · signal: see · confidence high
See Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U. S. 388, 391 .
examined Cited "see, e.g." Tineo v. Ashcroft (3×)
3rd Cir. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
Id. at 879; see also Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 (1947); Fleuti, 374 U.S. at 457-58 , 83 S.Ct. 1804 . 7 There are a few notable features of § 101(a)(13) which are relevant to our analysis.
examined Cited "see, e.g." Tineo v. Ashcroft (3×)
3rd Cir. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
Id. at 879; see also Delgadillo v. Carmichael, 332 U.S. 388, 390-91 , 68 S.Ct. 10 , 92 L.Ed. 17 (1947); Fleuti 374 U.S. at 457-58 , 83 S.Ct. 1804 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Delgadillo
v.
Carmichael, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service
63.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 10, 1947.
332 U.S. 388
1947 U.S. LEXIS 1644
Fred Okrand argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was A. L. Wirin., Robert W. Ginnane argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Perlman, Robert S. Erdahl and Sheldon E. Bernstein.
Douglas.
Cited by 206 opinions  |  Published
3 passages pin-cited by 3 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 92%
Citer courts: Second Circuit (6) · Eighth Circuit (6) · Court of Appeals of Texas (3)
Mr. Justice Douglas

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Petitioner is detained by respondent under a deportation order, the validity of which is challenged by a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The District Court granted the petition and discharged petitioner. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. 159 F. 2d 130. The case is here on a petition for a writ of certiorari which we granted because of the seeming conflict between the decision below and Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, 158 F. 2d 878, from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Petitioner is a Mexican citizen who made legal entry into this country in 1923 and resided here continuously until 1942. In June of that year, when this nation was engaged in hostilities with Germany and Japan, he shipped out of Los Angeles on an inter coastal voyage to New York City as a member of the crew of an American merchant ship. The ship was torpedoed after passing through the Panama Canal on its way to New York City. Petitioner was rescued and taken to Havana, Cuba, where he was taken care of by the American Consul for about one week. On July 19, 1942, he was returned to the United States through Miami, Florida, and thereafter continued to serve as a seaman in the merchant fleet of this nation. In March 1944 he was convicted in California of second-[*390] degree robbery and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of one year to life. While he was confined in the California prison, proceedings for deportation were commenced against him under § 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, 39 Stat. 874, as amended 54 Stat. 671, 8U. S. C. § 155 (a).

That section provides in part:

“. . . any alien who is hereafter sentenced to imprisonment for a term of one year or more because of conviction in this country of a crime involving moral turpitude, committed within five years after the entry of the alien to the United States . . . shall, upon the warrant of the Attorney General, be taken into custody and deported. . . .”

Those requirements for deportation are satisfied if petitioner’s passage from Havana, Cuba, to Miami, Florida, on July 19, 1942, was “the entry of the alien to the United States” within the meaning of the Act.

In United States ex rel. Claussen v. Day, 279 U. S. 398, United States ex rel. Stapf v. Corsi, 287 U. S. 129, and United States ex rel. Volpe v. Smith, 289 U. S. 422, there is language which taken from its context suggests that every return of an alien from a foreign country to the United States constitutes an “entry” within the meaning of the Act. Thus in the Smith case it was stated, 289 U. S. p. 425, that “any coming of an alien from a foreign country into the United States whether such coming be the first or any subsequent one” is such an “entry.” But those were cases where the alien plainly expected or planned to enter a foreign port or place. Here he was catapulted into the ocean, rescued, and taken to Cuba. He had no part in selecting the foreign port as his destination. His itinerary was forced on him by wholly fortuitous circumstances. If, nonetheless, his return to this country was an “entry” into the United States within the meaning of the Act, the[*391] law has been given a capricious application as Di Pasquale v. Karnuth, supra, suggests.

In that case an alien traveled between Buffalo and Detroit on a railroad which, unknown to him, passed through Canada. He was asleep during the time he was in transit through Canada and was quite unaware that he had left or returned to this country. The court refused to hold that the alien had made an “entry,” for to do so would impute to Congress a purpose to subject aliens “to the sport of chance.” 158 F. 2d 879. In this case petitioner, of course, chose to return to this country, knowing he was in a foreign place. But the exigencies of war, not his voluntary act, put him on foreign soil. [1] It would indeed be harsh to read the statute so as to add the peril of deportation to such perils of the sea. We might as well hold that if he had been kidnapped and taken to Cuba, he made a statutory “entry” on his voluntary return. Respect for law does not thrive on captious interpretations.

Deportation can be the equivalent of banishment or exile. See Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U. S. 135, 147. The stakes are indeed high and momentous for the alien who has acquired his residence here. We will not attribute to Congress a purpose to make his right to remain here dependent on circumstances so fortuitous and capricious as those upon which the Immigration Service has here seized. The hazards to which we are now asked to subject the alien are too irrational to square with the statutory scheme.

Other grounds are now sought to be advanced for the first time in support of the deportation order. They are not open on the record before us.

Reversed.

1

If his intercoastal voyage had continued without interruption, it is clear that he would not have made an “entry” when he landed at its termination. United, States ex rel. Claussen v. Day, supra, p. 401.