Samuels v. Holder et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM OPINION; Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 4/17/2012. (BST, )

Download PDF
FILED 2012 Apr-17 PM 02:21 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION ORRIN SAMUELS, Petitioner, v. ERIC HOLDER, Attorney General, et al., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. ) 4:11-cv-4035-PWG ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This is a habeas corpus case filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by Orrin Samuels, pro se. The petitioner contends that he is being illegally detained by the respondents and that he is due to be released from custody pending his removal to Guyana under the Immigration and Nationality Act. (Doc. 1). The respondents have filed a motion to dismiss this matter as being moot. (Doc. 7). Upon consideration, the court finds that the respondents’ motion is due to be granted and that the petition is due to be dismissed as moot. In support of their motion to dismiss, the respondents have filed a copy of an unsworn declaration made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 by the Assistant Field Office Director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Gadsden, Alabama. (Doc. 7-1). In that declaration the Assistant Field Office Director asserts that the petitioner was deported from the United States on March 21, 2012, pursuant to an order of removal issued by an Immigration Judge. (Id.). Thus, the petitioner’s claim for release under an order of supervision or for repatriation is moot. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir. 2003) (“a case must be dismissed as moot if the court can no longer provide ‘meaningful relief’”). Accordingly, this matter is due to be dismissed as moot. A separate order will be entered. Done this 17th day of April 2012. L. Scott Coogler United States District Judge 167458 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?