Isidore B. Mensah v. US Department of Homeland Security et al

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION AS MOOT by Judge S. James Otero. (See document for further details.) (sbou)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ISIDORE B. MENSAH,

12
13

Petitioner,
v.

Case No. EDCV 18-00462 SJO (AFM)
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
AS MOOT

14
15
16

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al.,
Respondents.

17
18
19

On March 7, 2018, petitioner, who is subject to a final order of removal, filed

20

a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28

21

U.S.C. § 2241. At the time he filed the petition, petitioner was in custody of the

22

United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). The petition

23

challenges petitioner’s continued detention by ICE pending his removal. On

24

March 19, 2018, mail addressed to petitioner at the facility in which he had been

25

detained was returned to the Court as undeliverable with a notation that petitioner

26

had been released. (ECF No. 4.) On April 2, 2018, in response to this Court’s order,

27

respondent filed a brief attaching documentation showing that petitioner was

28

1

removed from the United States on March 12, 2018 and arguing that his petition

2

should be dismissed as moot. (ECF No. 7.) Petitioner [did not] file a reply.

3

Federal court jurisdiction is limited to adjudication of actual cases and live

4

controversies. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990); North

5

Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971) (per curiam). A petition for a writ of

6

habeas corpus becomes moot when a prisoner who requests release from custody is

7

released before the court has addressed the merits of the petition. Lane v. Williams,

8

455 U.S. 624, 631 (1982); see Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) (“Once a

9

convict’s sentence has expired, however, some concrete and continuing injury other

10

than the now-ended incarceration or parole – some ‘collateral consequence’ of the

11

conviction – must exist if the suit is to be maintained.”).

12

In this petition, petitioner seeks an order releasing him from ICE custody

13

pending his removal. (ECF No. 1 at 6.) Because petitioner already has been released

14

from custody and removed, there is no additional relief that this Court could grant

15

petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed without prejudice as moot. See

16

Picrin–Peron v. Rison, 930 F.2d 773, 776 (9th Cir. 1991) (where release from

17

custody was the only relief sought, petitioner’s release rendered case moot); Chan v.

18

Sec’y of Homeland Sec., 2016 WL 4204596, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2016) (petition

19

challenging continued detention pending removal rendered moot by petitioner’s

20

removal); Kafatia v. Gilkey, 2012 WL 1987136, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2012)

21

(petition seeking release from ICE custody pending removal moot where petitioner

22

was released from ICE custody and removed to Malawi), report and recommendation

23

adopted, 2012 WL 1986316 (C.D. Cal. May 31, 2012).

24
25
26
27

DATED: 4/24/18
____________________________________
S. JAMES OTERO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

28
2