Summary
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed without prejudice a pro se habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the petitioner’s immigration detention. The court held that the petitioner’s current detention, which began on December 18, 2025, had lasted only 41 days when the petition was filed and therefore did not yet support a ripe claim under Zadvydas v. Davis. The court declined to aggregate any possible prior periods of detention and denied a certificate of appealability.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Petitioner's current post-removal-order detention was sufficiently prolonged and supported by evidence of no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future to state a claim under Zadvydas v. Davis.
- Whether periods of detention before the current detention must be aggregated with the current detention to determine whether the presumptively reasonable six-month detention period has elapsed.
- Whether the petition should be dismissed as premature when Petitioner's current detention had lasted only 41 days.
Holdings
- For purposes of determining whether the presumptively reasonable six-month period under Zadvydas has elapsed, the court considers only the detainee's current period of detention and does not aggregate possible prior periods of detention separated by release.
- A Zadvydas claim requires post-removal-order detention exceeding six months and evidence providing good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. Petitioner's 41 days of current detention was insufficient, so the claim was premature.
- The petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 was dismissed without prejudice as premature.
Key quotations
“In Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 690, the Supreme Court held that indefinite detention of aliens raises serious constitutional concerns.” (533 U.S. at 690)
“Thus, “in order to state a claim under Zadvydas the alien not only must show post-removal order detention in excess of six months but also must provide evidence of a good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.”” (287 F.3d at 1052)
“Thus, any claim under Zadvydas is not yet ripe and is dismissed without prejudice as premature.” (Order concluding analysis)
Factual background
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Cuba who is detained by ICE at the Baker County Detention Center. His removal order allegedly became final on August 6, 2010, and ICE allegedly re-detained him on December 18, 2025. He filed his habeas petition on January 28, 2026, asserting that his prolonged detention violated due process and requesting immediate release.
Procedural history
Petitioner alleged that ICE re-detained him on December 18, 2025, despite a final removal order entered in 2010, and sought immediate release. He filed the § 2241 petition on January 28, 2026, after 41 days of current detention. The court held that the current detention had not exceeded the presumptively reasonable six-month period and dismissed the petition without prejudice.