Binh v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 9/12/2018. (KEK)

Download PDF
FILED 2018 Sep-12 AM 11:52 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION NGUYEN VO BINH, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Respondent. } } } } } Case No.: 4:18-cv-1223-MHH-TMP } } } } } MEMORANDUM OPINION This action is before the Court on the respondent’s August 27, 2018 motion to dismiss. (Doc. 4). On August 3, 2018, Mr. Binh filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking his release from custody. (Doc. 1). In its motion, the respondent contends that the Court should dismiss Mr. Binh’s § 2241 habeas petition because United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement released Mr. Binh on August 22, 2018. (Doc. 4-1, Pitman Decl.). Because Mr. Binh has been released on an order of supervision, his petition seeking that very relief 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.’”); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 8 (1998) (once a habeas petitioner is released from custody, he must demonstrate collateral consequences to avoid mootness doctrine). Accordingly, by separate order, the Court will dismiss this matter. Khader v. Holder, 843 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (N.D. Ala. 2011). DONE this 12th day of September, 2018. _________________________________ MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA 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?