Benn v. Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement

Fifth Circuit

Benn v. Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement

82 F. App'x 139

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 5, 2003

Docket03-30114

StatusUnpublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 82 F. App'x 139 (Benn v. Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Benn v. Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 82 F. App'x 139 (5th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Nico Benn appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition which challenged his post-removal-order detention by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The district court did not err in denying the petition. Gisbert v. United States Attorney General, 988 F.2d 1437, 1440 (5th Cir.1993), amend *140 ed by 997 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir.1993). Benn’s post-removal-order detention was authorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)(C). Benn’s incomplete and conflicting statements to the INS hampered the INS’s ability to effectuate removal and served to extend the removal period of 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(1)(A). Balogun v. INS, 9 F.3d 347, 350-51 (5th Cir.1993). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM. *

Nico Benn appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition which challenged his post-removal-order detention by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). The district court did not err in denying the petition. Gisbert v. United States Attorney General, 988 F.2d 1437, 1440 (5th Cir.1993), amend *140 ed by 997 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir.1993). Benn’s post-removal-order detention was authorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)(C). Benn’s incomplete and conflicting statements to the INS hampered the INS’s ability to effectuate removal and served to extend the removal period of 8 U.S.C. 1231(a)(1)(A). Balogun v. INS, 9 F.3d 347, 350-51 (5th Cir.1993). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 F. App'x 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benn-v-bureau-of-immigration-customs-enforcement-ca5-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack