Sunda v. Holder et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying the petition for habeas corpus. Signed by District Judge Richard D. Rogers on 10/17/2013. Mailed to pro se party Douglas Sunda by regular mail. (ms)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
CASE NO. 13-3174-RDR
ERIC HOLDER, et al.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is a petition for habeas corpus filed pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner, an immigration detainee, proceeds pro
Petitioner seeks a court order directing that he remain in the
Rice County, Kansas, Jail until he is returned to Kenya. The petition
states that he has been advised that travel documents are pending;
however, he asks the court to direct respondents to show that Kenya
has agreed to accept him and that the travel documents are available.
“Habeas corpus review is available under § 2241 if one is ‘in
custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the
United States.’” McIntosh v. U.S. Parole Commission, 115 F.3d 809,
811 (10th Cir. 1997)(quoting § 2241(c)(3)). In order to proceed in an
action filed pursuant to § 2241, the petitioner must show that he has
exhausted the available administrative remedies before commencing a
petition in federal court. See Soberanes v. Comfort, 388 F.3d 1305,
1309 (10th Cir. 2004).
detention, and he acknowledges that he did not pursue an appeal from
constitutional challenge or alleged violation of federal law before
the court, nor does it appear that petitioner has properly exhausted
petition and finds no basis to conclude that petitioner’s present
detention is illegal or that a transfer to another location prior to
his repatriation would violate the Constitution or federal law.
IT IS, THEREFORE, BY THE COURT ORDERED the petition for habeas
corpus is denied.
A copy of this order shall be transmitted to petitioner.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
This 17th day of October, 2013, at Topeka, Kansas.
S/ Richard D. Rogers
RICHARD D. ROGERS
U.S. Senior District Judge
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?