Mensah v. Lowe

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry). Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 7/25/2018. (jr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHARLES MENSAH,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN CRAIG LOWE,
Respondent.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

No. 4:17-CV-1464
(Judge Brann)

MEMORANDUM OPINION
JULY 25, 2018
I.

BACKGROUND
Charles Mensah filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241 while detained by the Department of Homeland Security,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) at the Pike County Prison, Lords
Valley, Pennsylvania. Named as Respondent is Warden Craig Lowe of the Pike
County Prison. Service of the petition was previously ordered.
According to the Petitioner, he had been detained by ICE for approximately
seven (7) months at the time this matter was filed. Petitioner’s pending § 2241
petition challenged his indefinite detention pending completion of his removal
proceedings under the standards announced in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678
(2001) and related cases.

-1-

Mensah states that he is a native and citizen of Ghana who first entered the
United States on October 30, 1999 as a lawful permanent resident. On September
30, 2011, Petitioner attempted to re-enter this country and was paroled into the
United States as an arriving alien for the purpose of facing criminal prosecution
under an outstanding arrest warrant. See Doc. 5, pp. 2-3. Petitioner was thereafter
convicted of drug trafficking related offenses in the United States District Court for
the Western District of New York.
After completing his resulting prison term, Petitioner was taken into ICE
custody on February 3, 2017. An immigration judge ordered Petitioner’s removal
on July 12, 2017. This federal habeas corpus action was filed while Petitioner had
an appeal of the adverse removal decision pending before the Board of
Immigration Appeals (BIA). On November 17, 2017, Petitioner’s appeal was
dismissed by the BIA. See Doc. 7, p. 2. On January 3, 2018, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a final order of removal. See id.
II.

DISCUSSION
On July 12, 2018, Respondent filed a “Notice Of Suggestion of Mootness.”

Doc. 8, p. 1. The notice states that Petitioner was removed from the United States
on June 19, 2018. See id. at p. 2. Accordingly, Respondent contends that since
Mensah has been removed from this country, dismissal on the basis of mootness is
appropriate.
-2-

The case or controversy requirement of Article III, § 2 of the United States
Constitution subsists through all stages of federal judicial proceedings. Parties
must continue to have a “‘personal stake in the outcome’ of the lawsuit.” Lewis v.
Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477-78 (1990); Preiser v. Newkirk, 422
U.S. 395, 401 (1975). In other words, throughout the course of the action, the
aggrieved party must suffer or be threatened with actual injury caused by the
defendant. Lewis, 494 U.S. at 477.
The adjudicatory power of a federal court depends upon “the continuing
existence of a live and acute controversy.” Steffel v. Thompson, 415 U.S. 452, 459
(1974) (emphasis in original). “The rule in federal cases is that an actual
controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the
complaint is filed.” Id. at n.10 (citations omitted). “Past exposure to illegal
conduct is insufficient to sustain a present case or controversy ... if unaccompanied
by continuing, present adverse effects.” Rosenberg v. Meese, 622 F. Supp. 1451,
1462 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) (citing O’Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 495-96 (1974));
see also Gaeta v. Gerlinski, Civil No. 3:CV-02-465, slip op. at p. 2 (M.D. Pa. May
17, 2002) (Vanaskie, C.J.).
As relief, Mensah sought his immediate release from ICE detention. See
Doc. 1, p. 9. According to Respondent’s counsel, immigration officials informed
counsel that Petitioner was removed on June 19, 2018 and the ICE Online Detainee
-3-

Locator System verifies Mensah’s removal. See Doc. 8-1. Since Petitioner is no
longer being detained by ICE, under the principles set forth in Steffel, Mensah’s
instant petition is subject to dismissal as moot since it no longer presents an
existing case or controversy.
An appropriate Order follows.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
United States District Judge

-4-