Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center

S.D. California

Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center

DecidedFebruary 3, 2026

Docket3:26-cv-00599

StatusUnknown

This text of Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center (Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, (S.D. Cal. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BINIAM GEBRESLASE KIDANE, Case No.: 26-CV-599 JLS (SBC)

12 Petitioner, ORDER REFERRING PETITION TO 13 v. FEDERAL DEFENDERS FOR EVALUATION REGARDING 14 IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL ENFORCEMENT (ICE); WARDEN, 15 OTAY MESA DETENTION CENTER, (ECF No. 1) 16 Respondents. 17 18 Presently before the Court is Biniam Gebreslase Kidane’s Petition for Writ of 19 Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Pet.,” ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleges that 20 he has been detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) 21 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) division at the Otay Mesa Detention 22 Center since November 28, 2024. Pet. ¶ 11. 23 Having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal of the Petition 24 is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 25 2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are 26 vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”) (citing Hendricks 27 v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990)). However, the Court finds that the Petition 28 lacks sufficient detail for the Court to meaningfully consider the requested relief. 1 || Accordingly, the Court REFERS this Petition to Federal Defenders for an evaluation of 2 || whether appointment of counsel would be beneficial to Petitioner. The Court requests that 3 Federal Defenders make its evaluation and file a status report or appropriate motion by 4 March 3, 2026. The Clerk of the Court SHALL SERVE a copy of this Order and the 5 || Petition on the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 ||Dated: February 3, 2026 . tt f Le 8 on. Janis L. Sammartino 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BINIAM GEBRESLASE KIDANE, Case No.: 26-CV-599 JLS (SBC)

12 Petitioner, ORDER REFERRING PETITION TO 13 v. FEDERAL DEFENDERS FOR EVALUATION REGARDING 14 IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL ENFORCEMENT (ICE); WARDEN, 15 OTAY MESA DETENTION CENTER, (ECF No. 1) 16 Respondents. 17 18 Presently before the Court is Biniam Gebreslase Kidane’s Petition for Writ of 19 Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Pet.,” ECF No. 1). Petitioner alleges that 20 he has been detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) 21 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) division at the Otay Mesa Detention 22 Center since November 28, 2024. Pet. ¶ 11. 23 Having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal of the Petition 24 is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 25 2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are 26 vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”) (citing Hendricks 27 v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990)). However, the Court finds that the Petition 28 lacks sufficient detail for the Court to meaningfully consider the requested relief. 1 || Accordingly, the Court REFERS this Petition to Federal Defenders for an evaluation of 2 || whether appointment of counsel would be beneficial to Petitioner. The Court requests that 3 Federal Defenders make its evaluation and file a status report or appropriate motion by 4 March 3, 2026. The Clerk of the Court SHALL SERVE a copy of this Order and the 5 || Petition on the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 ||Dated: February 3, 2026 . tt f Le 8 on. Janis L. Sammartino 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Biniam Gebreslase Kidane v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/biniam-gebreslase-kidane-v-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice-casd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack