Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California recommends granting the respondent’s motion to dismiss an immigration habeas petition as moot. The petitioner sought release from detention, but was released on an order of supervision during the litigation, eliminating the Article III case or controversy. The court also directs substitution of the Warden, Golden State Annex, as respondent and random assignment to a district judge.
Holdings
- Petitioner’s release on an order of supervision mooted his challenge to the legality of his extended detention because he had received the remedy he sought and no live case or controversy remained.
- The warden of the facility where the petitioner is held is the proper respondent in a core habeas challenge to present physical confinement, and Warden, Golden State Annex should be substituted as respondent.
Questions Presented
- Whether Petitioner’s release from ICE detention on an order of supervision mooted his § 2241 challenge seeking immediate release.
- Whether the immediate custodian, Warden, Golden State Annex, should be substituted as the respondent in this core habeas challenge to physical confinement.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (8)
- Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004)(followed)
- Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1197 (9th Cir. 2024)(followed)
- Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990)(followed)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)(followed)
- Abdala v. INS, 488 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Riley v. INS, 310 F.3d 1253, 1256-57 (10th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014)(followed)
- Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…