Elkana-Enyobi v. Hassell

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM OPINION re 8 Motion to Dismiss. The petitioner having been removed, the court can no longer provide meaningful relief, and the 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is MOOT. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 5/13/2015. (YMB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION THOMPSON NDUBISI ELKANAENYOBI, Petitioner, v. SCOTT HASSELL, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 4:15-cv-00394-AKK-SGC MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an action on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by Thompson Ndubisi Elkana-Enyobi. (Doc. 1). The petitioner challenges his continued detention pending removal pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act. See generally, Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). On April 29, 2015, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action as moot on the grounds the petitioner has been removed from the United States. (Doc. 8). The respondent’s motion is supported by an attached declaration of the Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Gadsden, Alabama stating the petitioner was deported to Nigeria on April 28, 2015. (Doc. 8-1). Because the petitioner has been removed, the court can no longer provide meaningful relief, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is moot. See Nyaga v. 1 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.’”); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 8 (1998) (once habeas petitioner is released from custody, he must demonstrate collateral consequences to avoid mootness doctrine). Accordingly, the respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 8) is due to be GRANTED, and this action is due to be DISMISSED. A separate order will be entered. DONE the 13th day of May, 2015. _________________________________ ABDUL K. KALLON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?