Acheampong v. Hassell, et al
Filing
9
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 06/20/2017. (KBB)
FILED
2017 Jun-20 AM 08:52
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
RICHMOND ACHEAMPONG,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
WARDEN SCOTT HASSELL, et al., )
)
)
Respondents.
Civil Action Number
4:17-cv-00434-AKK-JHE
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 20, 2017, Richmond Acheampong filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc. 1. At the time he filed his
petition, Acheampong, a native of Ghana, was incarcerated at the Etowah County
Detention Center, in the custody of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (“ICE”). In his petition, Acheampong alleged that he was being
illegally detained by ICE pending his deportation to Ghana. See generally doc. 1.
On June 13, 2017, Acheampong was released from ICE custody and
removed from the United States to Ghana. Docs. 8; 8-1. Respondents have filed a
motion to dismiss the action as moot, since Acheampong is no longer in ICE
custody. Doc. 8.
After consideration of the record in this case and respondents’ motion to
dismiss, the court finds that Acheampong’s removal to Ghana has rendered his
habeas corpus petition moot. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir.
2003) (citations omitted); Soliman v. U.S. ex rel. INS, 296 F.3d 1237 (11th Cir.
2002). Moreover, the court finds that no exceptions to the mootness doctrine apply
in this case. See Carafas v. LaVallee, 391 U.S. 234, 237 (1968); Murphy v. Hunt,
455 U.S. 478, 482 (1982). Therefore, because there is no longer any relief that can
be granted to Acheampong, his petition is due to be dismissed as moot.
A final judgment will be entered contemporaneously herewith.
DONE the 20th day of June, 2017.
_________________________________
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?