Ricardo Angeles Hernandez v. Glades County Sheriff, Glades County Sheriff’s Office, Warden Glades Detention Facility, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Secretary of Homeland Security, Attorney General of the United States of America, Miami Field Office Director, Enforcement and Removal Operations, Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Immigration Customs Enforcement, and Department of Justice

Angeles Hernandez v. Glades County Sheriff · United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division · February 2, 2026 · No. 2:26-cv-90-JES-DNF

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida granted Ricardo Angeles Hernandez’s habeas petition in part. The court held that, because Hernandez had entered and resided in the United States for more than twenty years, his detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), rather than the mandatory detention provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The court ordered respondents to provide him with a bond hearing or release him under reasonable conditions within ten days.

Holdings

  1. Because Hernandez had entered the United States and had resided there continuously for more than twenty years, he was not eligible for expedited removal under § 1225(b)(1), and the authority to detain him arose under § 1226(a), not § 1225(b).
  2. As a noncitizen detained under § 1226(a), Hernandez was entitled to a bond hearing before an immigration judge.
  3. The court had jurisdiction to consider the petition, and exhaustion was excused as futile.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Hernandez, a noncitizen who had entered and continuously resided in the United States for more than twenty years, could be detained under the mandatory-detention provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) rather than under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
  2. Whether Hernandez was entitled to an individualized bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).
  3. Whether the district court had jurisdiction to consider the habeas petition and whether failure to exhaust administrative remedies required dismissal.

Disposition

writ_granted

Cases Cited (10)

  • Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights v. Noem, --- F. Supp. ---, ---, 2025 WL 2192986, at *5 (D.D.C. 2025)(followed)
  • Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 289, 306 (2018)(followed)
  • Leng May Ma v. Barber, 357 U.S. 185, 187 (1958)(followed)
  • Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206 (1953)(followed)
  • Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 693 (2001)(followed)
  • Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369, 400–01, 403 (2024)(followed)
  • In re Yajure Hurtado, 29 I. & N. Dec. 216, 229 (B.I.A. 2025)(distinguished)
  • Cetino v. Hardin, No. 2:25-cv-1037-JES-DNF (M.D. Fla. Dec. 12, 2025)(followed)
  • Patel v. Parra, No. 2:25-cv-870-JES-NPM (M.D. Fla. Dec. 2, 2025)(followed)
  • Reyes Rodriguez v. Florida Southside Facility, No. 2:25-cv-1012-JES-DNF (M.D. Fla. Dec. 15, 2025)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…