Martinez v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al

Filing 14

ORDER DISMISSING Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Court dismisses the petition for writ of habeas corpus as moot. Signed by Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on 6/7/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lrf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARCELINO SANCHEZ MARTINEZ,

Case No.: 15-CV-0962-AJB-NLS

Petitioner,

12
13
14

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

v.
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT; F. LAWRENCE,
Warden,

15
16

(Doc. No. 1)

Respondents.

17
18
19
20

Presently before the Court is Petitioner Marcelino Sanchez Martinez’s (“Petitioner”)

21

petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. No. 1.) On August 22,

22

2016, Respondents filed a return, informing the Court that Petitioner was removed to

23

Mexico on April 21, 2016, and was thus no longer in ICE custody. (Doc. Nos. 9, 9-1.) On

24

December 9, 2016, the Court ordered Respondents to file supplemental briefing addressing

25

whether any collateral consequences exist that would render finding the petition moot

26

inappropriate. (Doc. No. 11.) Respondents filed that briefing on January 12, 2017. (Doc.

27

No. 13.) After a thorough review of the papers and applicable law, the Court DISMISSES

28

the petition for writ of habeas corpus AS MOOT.
1
15-CV-0962-AJB-NLS

1

Petitioner, a Mexican citizen, brings this petition to challenge his detention during

2

removal proceedings. While his 177-page petition is far from clear, the Court construes the

3

petition as challenging the propriety of being denied parole or bond during those

4

proceedings. (Doc. No. 1 at 67.) The petition otherwise does not specify the grounds for

5

the petition or the relief Petitioner seeks.

6

“Deportation from the United States after filing a habeas petition” will moot a

7

petitioner’s claim unless there is “some remaining ‘collateral consequence’ that may be

8

redressed by success on the petition.” Abdala v. INS, 488 F.3d 1061, 1063–64 (9th Cir.

9

2007) (citations omitted). If “the habeas petition[] raised claims that were fully resolved by

10

release from custody,” the petition is moot. Id. at 1065. Collateral consequences

11

notwithstanding deportation after the filing of the petition have been found to exist where,

12

for example, a petitioner challenged an aggravated felony conviction, which would bar him

13

from reentering the country for twenty years. Zegarra-Gomez v. INS, 314 F.3d 1124, 1127

14

(9th Cir. 2003). In contrast, petitions were found moot and not saved by the collateral

15

consequences doctrine where, for example, a petitioner requested only a stay of deportation

16

and was later deported, Hose v. INS, 180 F.3d 992, 995 (9th Cir.1999), and a petitioner was

17

released after challenging the legality of his extended detention, Riley v. INS, 310 F.3d

18

1253, 1256–57 (10th Cir. 2002).

19

Here, Petitioner asserts he “should have been detained (temporarily) then either

20

paroled or bonded out immediately . . . .” (Doc. No. 1 at 67.) Accordingly, the Court

21

construes the petition as challenging the legality of Petitioner’s detention during removal

22

proceedings. Because Petitioner has since been released from custody, the Petition is moot.

23

Abdala, 488 F.3d at 1064; Riley, 310 F.3d at 1256–57; see Adem v. Kane, No. CIV-14-

24

2472-PHX-GMS (MHB), 2014 WL 12614446, at *1 (D. Ariz. Dec. 22, 2014)

25

(recommending that § 2241 petition be dismissed as moot when petitioner asserting “he is

26

entitled to supervised release from custody because his detention is not authorized by law”

27

was released from custody).

28

//
2
15-CV-0962-AJB-NLS

1
2

Based on the foregoing, the Court DISMISSES the petition for writ of habeas corpus
AS MOOT.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: June 7, 2017

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
15-CV-0962-AJB-NLS