Al Shimary v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Director of the Detroit Field Office

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan
DecidedJuly 31, 2024
Docket2:24-cv-11646
StatusUnknown

This text of Al Shimary v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Director of the Detroit Field Office (Al Shimary v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Director of the Detroit Field Office) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Al Shimary v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Director of the Detroit Field Office, (E.D. Mich. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION NAIF AL SHIMARY,

Petitioner, Case No. 2:24-cv-11646 Honorable Jonathan J.C. Grey v. United States District Judge

MARTY C. RAYBORN, District Director, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Detroit Field Office, et. al.,

Respondents, / OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO VACATE THE STAY (ECF No. 6) Naif Al Shimary, (“Petitioner”), confined at the St. Clair County Jail in Port Huron, Michigan, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, through counsel Iris E. Rubin, in which he challenges his continued detention by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Magistrate Judge David R. Grand signed an order requiring a responsive pleading and staying Petitioner’s removal or deportation until further order by this Court. (ECF No. 3.) Respondent has filed an answer to the petition (ECF No. 5) and a motion to vacate the stay of removal (ECF No. 6). For the reasons that follow, Respondent’s motion is GRANTED.

I. Background Petitioner was born in Iraq on July 1, 1984 and left that country with his entire family in 1991 during the Gulf War. The family lived in a

United Nations refugee camp in Saudi Arabia for three years until they were given refugee status in the United States. Petitioner arrived with his entire family in the United States in July of 1994 when he was ten

years old. From that time on, Petitioner has had Legal Permanent Residence and never left the United States. (Petitioner’s Exhibit 1 – Green Card, ECF No. 1, PageID.18.) Petitioner’s father and

seven of his siblings are all United States citizens. His mother is deceased. Petitioner and one of his brothers are the only family members that are not U.S. citizens.

On January 29, 2015, Petitioner was ordered removed from the United States at a hearing before the Immigration Court in Detroit. (Petitioner’s Exhibit 6 – Immigration Status Re: Removal, ECF No. 1,

PageID.87.) The basis for his removal appears to be Petitioner’s convictions in the Wayne County Circuit Court for felony theft in 2002 and a 2009 conviction in the Wayne County Circuit Court of first-degree home invasion, assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than

murder, felonious assault, and felony-firearm.1 On September 6, 2023, the Michigan State Parole Board granted early release to Petitioner after they determined that he was

rehabilitated, showed no violent tendencies, and was not a danger to the community.

Upon his release from state prison, ICE placed an immigration hold on Petitioner. Petitioner has been incarcerated on this hold in the St. Clair County Jail since September 6, 2023. If released, Petitioner would

reside with his father or his fiancée in Michigan. Petitioner also has jobs available for him to start immediately upon his release. He has resided in the United States since he was ten years old. His

father and seven of his eight siblings live in or near Dearborn Heights, Michigan. Petitioner has two U.S. born children who are teenagers who live with their mother, Petitioner’s ex-wife, in Warren, Michigan.

1 Petitioner sought habeas relief on this latter conviction in this Court before Judge Paul D. Borman, who denied the petition. Al-Shimary v. Palmer, No. 2:12-CV- 10001, 2013 WL 3148191 (E.D. Mich. June 19, 2013). On September 27, 2023, ICE served Petitioner a notice of failure to comply pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(g) for failing to complete a travel

document application. On December 5, 2023, ICE completed a 90-day custody review and determined that Petitioner’s detention would continue pending his travel document request. ICE Headquarters

requested that the Detroit office submit a travel document request for Petitioner on February 22, 2024. ICE continued Petitioner’s detention

pending adjudication of his travel document request on June 3, 2024. (Respondent’s Exhibit 1, ECF No. 5-1, PageID.197). Respondent, in their reply, attached a “one way laissez passer,” a travel document issued by

the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Iraq, which was issued on June 12, 2024. (ECF No. 9-1.) Further, Respondent stated that the Petitioner’s removal has been scheduled for early August. (ECF No.

9.) II. Discussion

Pursuant to the REAL ID Act and under these specific facts, this Court lacks jurisdiction at this time to stay Petitioner’s removal. See Hamama v. Adducci, 912 F.3d 869, 875–76 (6th Cir. 2018). Accordingly,

the motion to vacate the stay is GRANTED. (ECF No. 9.) If Petitioner seeks a stay of his final removal, he must seek relief from the appropriate United States Court of Appeals.

However, since Petitioner’s right to a release from detention on a habeas petition depends on whether removal is reasonably foreseeable and the parties dispute whether Petitioner will be removed in the

reasonably foreseeable future (in early August), the Court ORDERS the Respondent to submit a status report using the utilities function on

CM/ECF on or before August 20, 2024. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 689 (2001) (“once removal is no longer reasonably foreseeable, continued detention is no longer authorized by statute.”) Respondent

shall provide a copy of the report to Petitioner’s counsel. III. ORDER It is ORDERED that the motion to vacate the stay of removal (ECF

No. 6) is GRANTED. The stay is VACATED. Further, Respondent SHALL submit a status report on or before August 20, 2024.2

2 Further delay in removal might warrant granting Petitioner bond and/or habeas relief. See Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 689. SO ORDERED. s/ Jonathan J.C. Grey HON. JONATHAN J.C. GREY Dated: July 31, 2024 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Certificate of Service The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to their respective email or First-Class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on July 31, 2024.

s/ S. Osorio Sandra Osorio Case Manager

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Zadvydas v. Davis
533 U.S. 678 (Supreme Court, 2001)
Usama Hamama v. Rebecca Adducci
912 F.3d 869 (Sixth Circuit, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Al Shimary v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Director of the Detroit Field Office, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/al-shimary-v-us-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-director-of-the-mied-2024.