Rakhim Rasulovich Shoimov v. Christopher Chestnut

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants Rakhim Rasulovich Shoimov’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his immigration detention. The court holds that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory-detention provision in 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), governs his re-detention and that due process required a pre-deprivation bond hearing. The court orders his immediate release and bars re-detention unless the government establishes by clear and convincing evidence at a hearing before a neutral decisionmaker that he is a flight risk or danger to the community.

Holdings

1. The warden of the facility where the petitioner is physically confined is the proper respondent in a core habeas challenge to present detention; the other named officials were dismissed.
2. Shoimov was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), not mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), because he had resided in the United States for more than two years after being released under § 1226 and was not arrested upon arrival.
3. A noncitizen previously released under § 1226(a) has a protected liberty interest in continued release and must receive a pre-deprivation bond hearing before re-detention, where the government seeks to justify custody based on flight risk or danger to the community.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Shoimov was subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
2. Whether re-detaining Shoimov after his prior release without a pre-deprivation bond hearing violated the Due Process Clause.
3. Whether the facility warden was the proper respondent in a core habeas challenge to present physical confinement.

Disposition

writ_granted