Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California construed a pro se immigration detainee’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition as including a request for a temporary restraining order. The court ordered respondents to respond, barred transfer of the petitioner outside the district pending further order, granted in forma pauperis status, and appointed counsel.
Holdings
- The court construed petitioner's § 2241 pleading as a motion for a temporary restraining order based on the substance of the brief and the relief requested.
- Pending further order, respondents were prohibited from transferring petitioner to another detention center outside the Eastern District of California.
- The interests of justice required appointment of counsel for petitioner because of the complexity of the legal issues involved.
Questions Presented
- Whether the substance of the pro se § 2241 pleading and requested relief warranted construction as a motion for a temporary restraining order.
- Whether the court could temporarily prohibit respondents from transferring petitioner outside the district to preserve the court's jurisdiction over the pending habeas petition.
- Whether petitioner should be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
- Whether the interests of justice required appointment of counsel for petitioner.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)(applied)
- F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 608 (1966)(applied)
- Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…