Camarena v. United States
This text of Camarena v. United States (Camarena v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * *
6 Roberto Izquierdo Camarena, Case No. 2:25-cv-01219-RFB-EJY
7 Plaintiff, ORDER
8 v.
9 United States of America, et al.,
10 Defendants.
11 12 Petitioner Roberto Izquierdo Camarena has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 13 under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), and a Motion 14 for Appointment of Counsel. See ECF Nos. 1, 1-1, 1-2. Camarena challenges his prolonged 15 detention without a fair bond hearing. He seeks an order directing the respondents to immediately 16 release him or, alternatively, an order directing the respondents to provide Camarena with another 17 bond hearing wherein the government bears the burden of proof to show, by clear and convincing 18 evidence, that Camarena is currently a danger to the community or a flight risk. Having conducted 19 a preliminary review of the petition, the Court directs service on the respondents. 20 The Court grants the Motion to Proceed IFP but denies the Motion for Appointment of 21 Counsel without prejudice given that (1) there is no constitutional right to appointment of counsel 22 in a federal habeas corpus proceeding, (2) the case is not especially complex, and (3) Camarena 23 has shown himself capable of fairly presenting his claims. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006(a)(2)(B); 24 Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Luna v. Kernan, 784 F.3d 640, 642 (9th Cir. 25 2015) (citing Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U.S. 327, 336–37 (2007)). 26 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis 27 (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED. 28 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Appointment of Counsel (ECF No. 1- 2)is DENIED without prejudice. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court (1) file the Petition (ECF No. 1-1); and (2) SERVE copies of the Petition (ECF No. 1-1) and this Order on Respondents as follows: 5 1. By electronically through CM/ECF serving a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1-1) 6 and this Order on the United State Attorney for the District of Nevada in accordance with Rule 5(b)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 9 2. By sending a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1-1) and this Order by mail to: (1) 10 Kristi Noem, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, 2707 Martin 11 Luther King Jr. Ave SE, Washington, DC 20528; (2) Pamela J. Bondi, Attorney 12 General of the United States, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 13 20530-0001; and (3) Kerri Ann Quihuis, ICE Field Office Director for Nevada, 501 14 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 536, Las Vegas, NV 89101. 15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents file and serve their response to the 16 | Petition within 21 days of this Order, unless additional time is allowed for good cause shown. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Camarena will have 14 days from the date of service 18 | ofthe response to file and serve his reply, unless additional time is allowed for good cause shown. 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to provide a copy of 20 | this Order to Camarena. nm 71 DATED: August 30, 2025.
23 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 27 28
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Camarena v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/camarena-v-united-states-nvd-2025.