Robert I. Hutson, Plaintiff-appellant, v. the United States, the United States Customs Service, Thehonorable William Von Raab, Commissioner Ofcustoms and the Honorable John v. Linde,district Director of Customs,boston, Defendant-appellee, 878 F.2d 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - 878 F.2d 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1989) May 15, 1989

Before FRIEDMAN, MAYER and MICHEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


DECISION

Robert I. Hutson appeals the decision of the Court of International Trade, No. 87-09-00962 (August 26, 1988), upholding the decision of the District Director of the United States Customs Service to revoke Hutson's privilege of access to Customs Security Access Zones (CSA zones) at Logan International Airport, Boston, Massachusetts. We affirm.

OPINION

On November 25, 1985, Hutson violated 19 U.S.C. § 1592 (1982) by attempting to introduce merchandise into United States commerce by means of material, false statements. Such introduction possibly would have deprived the United States of lawful duties. Notwithstanding this violation of customs law, Hutson argues that the District Director abused his discretion when, upon learning of Hutson's violation, he revoked the access granted to Hutson, in March 1986 and subsequent to the section 1592 violation, to enter the CSA zones unescorted. The District Director notified Hutson of the revocation on October 3, 1986.

We reject Hutson's argument that since the violation predated granting of the clearance, it could not justify revocation. Hutson's violation reasonably caused the District Director to believe, at the time he became aware of it, that Hutson's unescorted access to the CSA zones posed a threat to the revenue and security in those areas. The District Director may lawfully "revoke or suspend access to the Customs security area ... [when] [t]he continuation of privileges would, in the judgment of the district director, endanger the revenue or security of the area." 19 C.F.R. Sec. 6.12a(h) and subsection (4) (1986). The decision of the Court of International Trade is affirmed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.