|
''Clark v. Martinez'', 543 U.S. 371 (2005) was a United States Supreme Court case about the detention of inadmissible immigrants during the deportation process. An alien can be found inadmissible on the grounds of poor health, criminal history, substance trafficking, prostitution/human trafficking, money laundering, terrorist activity, etc.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_08_00001182----000-.html )〕 The deportation process requires a ruling from an immigration judge for violating immigration laws.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=773895c4f635f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=b328194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD )〕 The case attempted to resolve the conflicting rulings made by the 9th and 11th circuits on whether ''Zadvydas v. Davis'' (2001) was applicable to inadmissible immigrants, Sergio Martinez and Daniel Benitez. The cases of Martinez and Benitez were later consolidated by the Supreme Court. Zadvydas v. Davis states that the government can detain admissible and admitted aliens only long enough beyond the 90 day removal period if necessary for deportation. If deportation is unforeseeable then the immigrant must be released.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2004/2004_03_878 )〕 ''Zadvydas v. Davis'' fails to define if immigrants inadmissible to the U.S. have these same protections. The Supreme Court decision (7-2) found that ''Zadvydas v. Davis'' was in fact applicable to inadmissible immigrants. In the case of Martinez and Benitez where deportation to Cuba is implausible, further detention is unnecessary.〔 The court however did not grant constitutional protection from indefinite detention to inadmissible immigrants. ==History== Cubans Sergio Suarez Martinez and Daniel Benitez gained access to the US in June 1980’s via the Mariel Boatlift. By the time they had applied for legal permanent residence through the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act; which allows Cubans who have been living in the US for a year to apply. Both men, however, had racked up significant criminal charges thus they could not qualify for the adjustment from refugee to legal permanent resident.〔http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=6d893a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=6d893a4107083210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD〕 “When Martinez sought adjustment in 1991, he had been convicted of assault with a deadly weapon in Rhode Island and burglary in California, Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7; when Benitez sought adjustment in 1985, he had been convicted of grand theft in Florida, 337 F. 3d, at 1290. Both men were convicted of additional felonies after their adjustment applications were denied: Martinez of petty theft with a prior conviction (1996), assault with a deadly weapon (1998), and attempted oral copulation by force (1999), see Pet. for Cert. in No. 03-878, at 7-8; Benitez of two counts of armed robbery, armed burglary of a conveyance, armed burglary of a structure, aggravated battery, carrying a concealed firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense, and unlawful possession, sale, or delivery of a firearm with an altered serial number (1993), see 337 F. 3d, at 1290-1291.”〔 Both Martinez and Benitez had their parole revoked and faced deportation by Immigration and Naturalization Services “INS”. While being detained by INS, Martinez and Benitez, each filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus to challenge their indefinite detention.〔 On October 30, 2002, Martinez was granted petition by the United States District Court for the District of Oregon under ''Martinez v. Smith'' and was to be released at the digression of INS. Whereas Benitez was denied petition by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida under ''Benitez v. Wallis'' on July 11, 2002.〔 These contracting interpretations of ''Zadvydas v. Davis'' led to the cases being consolidated by the United States Supreme Court. Martinez was held by INS until after the decision was made by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005. Benitez was paroled and released to family sponsors, two days after his case was heard by the Supreme Court, October 15, 2004. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Clark v. Martinez」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|