Omar Assaf Junior v. Secretary of State and United States Attorney General

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed without prejudice Omar Assaf Junior’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging certification of his extradition to Brazil. The court held that the rule of non-inquiry barred judicial consideration of his claims that extradition would violate the Convention Against Torture and that those claims were not ripe because the Secretary of State had not decided whether to surrender him. The court denied a certificate of appealability and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. Collateral habeas review of a magistrate judge's certificate of extraditability is limited to jurisdiction, whether the offense is covered by the treaty, and whether evidence supports reasonable grounds to believe the accused committed the offense; the court may not review the wisdom or humanitarian consequences of extradition.
2. The rule of non-inquiry precludes the district court from considering whether extradition to Brazil would expose Petitioner to torture in violation of the Convention Against Torture.
3. Petitioner's Convention Against Torture challenge was not ripe because the Secretary of State had not yet decided whether to surrender him to Brazil.
4. The extradition process did not violate Petitioner's Fifth Amendment due process rights because humanitarian and Convention Against Torture concerns are considered by the Secretary of State, and Petitioner received an extradition hearing and habeas review.
5. Petitioner was not entitled to a certificate of appealability because he failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

Questions Presented

1. Whether habeas review of the magistrate judge's extradition certification permitted the district court to consider Petitioner's Convention Against Torture and humanitarian concerns.
2. Whether Petitioner's Convention Against Torture challenge was ripe before the Secretary of State decided whether to surrender him to Brazil.
3. Whether the extradition process, including consideration of humanitarian concerns by the Secretary of State rather than the court, satisfied Petitioner's Fifth Amendment due process rights.
4. Whether Petitioner was entitled to a certificate of appealability.

Disposition

dismissed