Walker v. Holder et al

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry) re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Peter W. Walker. Signed by Honorable John E. Jones, III on 6/13/14. (pw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PETER WALKER,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC HOLDER, et al.,
Respondents.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

1:14-CV-530
Hon. John E. Jones III

MEMORANDUM
June 13, 2014
On March 20, 2014, Petitioner, Peter Walker, a native and citizen of
Jamaica, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
challenging his continued detention by the United States Immigration and Custody
Enforcement (“ICE”) and seeking a release from confinement on an order of
supervision. (Doc. 1, pp. 18, 25). At the time his petition was filed, Petitioner
was detained at the Pike County Correctional Facility, in Lords Valley,
Pennsylvania. (Doc. 1).
On June 10, 2014, Respondents filed a suggestion of mootness stating that
Petitioner was released from ICE custody on June 9, 2014 on an order of
supervision. (Doc. 10, Exhibit 1). Respondents argue that the habeas petition is
therefore moot. (Doc. 10, pp. 1-2), citing Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77
F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) (“If developments occur during the course of

adjudication that eliminate a plaintiff’s personal stake in the outcome of a suit or
prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be
dismissed as moot.”); DeFoy v. McCullough, 393 F.3d 439, 441 (3d Cir. 2005).
For the reasons set forth below, the habeas petition will be dismissed as moot.
I.

DISCUSSION
Article III of the Constitution dictates that a federal court may adjudicate

“only actual, ongoing cases or controversies.” Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp.,
494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990); Burkey v. Marberry, 556 F.3d 142, 147 (3d Cir. 2009).
“[A] petition for habeas corpus relief generally becomes moot when a prisoner is
released from custody before the court has addressed the merits of the petition.”
Diaz-Cabrera v. Sabol, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124195, *3 (M.D. Pa. 2011)
(Jones, J.) (quoting Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624, 631 (1982)). Specifically,
“the dismissal of a habeas petition as moot is appropriate where a petitioner
challenging his continued detention is released from ICE custody on an order of
supervision.” Id., citing Phat v. Gonzales, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61259 (M.D.
Pa. 2007) (McClure, J.) (concluding that the petitioner’s release from ICE custody
on an order of supervision renders the habeas petition moot).
In the present case, the habeas petition only challenges Petitioner’s
continued detention pending removal. See (Doc. 1). Because Petitioner has since
2

been released from ICE custody on an order of supervision, the petition no longer
presents an existing case or controversy. See Diaz-Cabrera, 2011 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 124195 at *2-4. Further, Petitioner has received the only habeas relief he
sought, namely, to be released from ICE custody on a supervision order. See
Sanchez v. AG, 146 Fed. Appx. 547, 549 (3d Cir. 2005) (holding that the habeas
petition challenging the petitioner’s continued detention by ICE was rendered
moot once the petitioner was released). Accordingly, the instant habeas corpus
petition will be dismissed as moot.
A separate Order will be issued.

3