Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia orders service of Iakov Ankudinov’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition on the Warden and relevant federal officials. The order sets deadlines for the respondent’s answer and the petitioner’s reply, addresses required detention records, and establishes procedures for any motion seeking interim relief.
Holdings
- Because it did not plainly appear that Petitioner was not entitled to habeas relief, the court declined to dismiss the petition at the screening stage and ordered service.
- The court directed service of the petition and order on the Attorney General, the respondent warden, and the civil process clerk for the United States Attorney's Office, and required the respondent to file an answer within seven business days addressing the allegations and certifying the true cause of detention.
- A petitioner seeking release from detention while the habeas petition is pending must demonstrate both a likelihood of success on the merits of a substantial constitutional claim and extraordinary and exceptional circumstances making release necessary to preserve the effectiveness of the requested habeas relief.
Questions Presented
- Whether the § 2241 petition should be dismissed at the initial Rule 4 screening stage.
- What service, answer, record-production, and response procedures should govern the habeas proceeding.
- What showing a petitioner must make to obtain interim release from immigration detention while the habeas petition is pending.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (4)
- Wilcox v. Ford, 813 F.2d 1140 (11th Cir. 1987)(followed)
- Gomez v. United States, 899 F.2d 1124 (11th Cir. 1990)(followed)
- Wilson v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., No. 17-10060-D, 2017 WL 11815408 (11th Cir. May 10, 2017)(followed)
- Mapp v. Reno, 241 F.3d 221, 225 (2d Cir. 2001)(persuasive)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…