Thelemaque v. GILLIS
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 9 Report and Recommendations. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED with prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 1/8/2021 (PG)
Case 5:20-cv-00103-DCB-MTP Document 10 Filed 01/08/21 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-cv-103-DCB-MTP
WARDEN SHAWN GILLIS
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael
T. Parker’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 9].
filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the
deadline for filing such objections has passed.
carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
[ECF No. 1], the Respondent’s Response in Opposition to the
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 8], other filings in
this matter, and applicable law, the Court finds the Report and
Recommendation to be well taken.
In October 2018, an immigration judge entered an order of
removal against Petitioner to his native Haiti.
Petitioner has unsuccessfully exhausted appeals of that order up
to, most recently, the United States Second Circuit Court of
Case 5:20-cv-00103-DCB-MTP Document 10 Filed 01/08/21 Page 2 of 3
Thelemaque v. Barr, No. 19-1349 (2d Cir. 2019)(PACER
site last visited Jan. 5, 2021).
During the pendency of his
appeals and while held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(“ICE”) custody at the Adams County Detention Center, Petitioner
filed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus now at issue.
Petitioner argues that his extended detention in ICE
custody is unlawful under the United States Supreme Court’s
holding in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001).
[ECF No. 1
However, given the final denial of Petitioner’s
appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit, see Thelemaque, No. 19-1349 (denials entered Aug. 11,
2020 at docket nos. 73 & 74, and mandate issued Oct. 2, 2020 at
docket no. 77), the uncontested evidence of the Haitian
Consulate’s general cooperation in the issuance of travel
documents, see Declaration of Ian Spino, [ECF No. 8-1] ¶ 12, and
the absence of any objection from Petitioner to the Report and
Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has failed to
show that there is no significant likelihood of his removal to
Haiti in the reasonably foreseeable future.
Petitioner has not
met his burden of proof under Zadvydas, and his Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied.
As noted in the Report and
Recommendation, the Court’s dismissal with prejudice of the
Petition does not suggest that Petitioner may be held
indefinitely or that he is precluded from applying for relief if
Case 5:20-cv-00103-DCB-MTP Document 10 Filed 01/08/21 Page 3 of 3
it becomes unlikely that he will be removed in the reasonably
foreseeable future. [ECF No. 9, n.2].
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation [ECF No. 9] is ADOPTED as the findings and
conclusions of this Court; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED with prejudice.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
SO ORDERED this the 8th day of January, 2021.
/s/ David Bramlette_________
UNITED STATES 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?