Castro-Jiminez v. Bulger

Fifth Circuit

Castro-Jiminez v. Bulger

104 F. App'x 440

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 17, 2004·No. 04-60271·Unpublished·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Rene Castro-Jiminez, federal prisoner # 90503-000, appeals the denial of his 28 *441 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his continued immigration detention. Castro, an inadmissible Mariel Cuban, argues pursuant to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001), that his continued detention is violative of his constitutional rights.

Castro’s claim is foreclosed by Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 988 F.2d 1437, 1442 (5th Cir.), amended by, Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 997 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir.1993). See Rios v. INS, 324 F.3d 296, 297 (5th Cir.2003). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.

Castro’s request that his appeal be stayed pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Benitez v. Wallis, 337 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2003), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 1143, 157 L.Ed.2d 966 (U.S. Jan. 16, 2004) (No. 03-7434), is denied. Despite the grant of certiorari, we continue to follow our own binding precedent. See Wicker v. McCotter, 798 F.2d 155, 157-58 (5th Cir.1986). Castro’s request for appointment of counsel is similarly denied.

AFFIRMED; MOTIONS FOR STAY OF APPEAL AND APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *441 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: *

Rene Castro-Jiminez, federal prisoner # 90503-000, appeals the denial of his 28 *441 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his continued immigration detention. Castro, an inadmissible Mariel Cuban, argues pursuant to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001), that his continued detention is violative of his constitutional rights.

Castro’s claim is foreclosed by Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 988 F.2d 1437, 1442 (5th Cir.), amended by, Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 997 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir.1993). See Rios v. INS, 324 F.3d 296, 297 (5th Cir.2003). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition.

Castro’s request that his appeal be stayed pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Benitez v. Wallis, 337 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir.2003), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 1143, 157 L.Ed.2d 966 (U.S. Jan. 16, 2004) (No. 03-7434), is denied. Despite the grant of certiorari, we continue to follow our own binding precedent. See Wicker v. McCotter, 798 F.2d 155, 157-58 (5th Cir.1986). Castro’s request for appointment of counsel is similarly denied.

AFFIRMED; MOTIONS FOR STAY OF APPEAL AND APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *441 published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Castro-Jiminez v. Bulger, 104 F. App'x 440 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

104 F. App'x 440 (Castro-Jiminez v. Bulger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related