Devadas v. Barr

N.D. Alabama

Devadas v. Barr

DecidedOctober 2, 2020

Docket4:19-cv-02004

StatusUnknown

This text of Devadas v. Barr (Devadas v. Barr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Devadas v. Barr, (N.D. Ala. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

ANTONY M. DEVADAS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 4:19-cv-02004-AKK-HNJ ) WILLIAM BARR, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION On July 30, 2020, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending the court dismiss this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition without prejudice and advising Petitioner of his right to file specific written objections within fourteen (14) days. (Doc. 18). On August 11, 2020, Devadas filed objections to the report and recommendation. (Doc. 19). On October 2, 2020, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the action as moot. (Doc. 20). Respondents support the motion with the declaration of Michael A. Martin, a Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). (Doc. 20-1). Martin’s review of Petitioner’s detention history on the ICE database shows his release from ICE custody and removal to Sri Lanka on September 17, 2020. (Id. at 2). A certified copy of Petitioner’s detention history on the database corroborates Martin’s testimony. (Id. at 3). Petitioner’s removal to Sri Lanka renders his petition seeking relief in the form of release from ICE custody moot. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir. 2003) (‘a case must be dismissed as moot if the court can no longer provide ‘meaningful relief”); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-8 (1998) (once a habeas petitioner is released from custody, he must demonstrate collateral

consequences to avoid mootness doctrine). Accordingly, this matter is due to be dismissed. Khader vy. Holder, 843 F. Supp. 2d 1202, 1202 (N.D. Ala. 2011). Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the material in the court file, including the report and recommendation, and the objections thereto, the court ADOPTS the report of the magistrate judge and ACCEPTS his recommendation as MODIFIED. This court finds that this habeas petition is due to be DISMISSED as MOOT. The court will enter an appropriate order. DONE the 2nd day of October, 2020.

Abs bho tr ABDUL K. KALLON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION

ANTONY M. DEVADAS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 4:19-cv-02004-AKK-HNJ ) WILLIAM BARR, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION On July 30, 2020, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending the court dismiss this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition without prejudice and advising Petitioner of his right to file specific written objections within fourteen (14) days. (Doc. 18). On August 11, 2020, Devadas filed objections to the report and recommendation. (Doc. 19). On October 2, 2020, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the action as moot. (Doc. 20). Respondents support the motion with the declaration of Michael A. Martin, a Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). (Doc. 20-1). Martin’s review of Petitioner’s detention history on the ICE database shows his release from ICE custody and removal to Sri Lanka on September 17, 2020. (Id. at 2). A certified copy of Petitioner’s detention history on the database corroborates Martin’s testimony. (Id. at 3). Petitioner’s removal to Sri Lanka renders his petition seeking relief in the form of release from ICE custody moot. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir. 2003) (‘a case must be dismissed as moot if the court can no longer provide ‘meaningful relief”); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-8 (1998) (once a habeas petitioner is released from custody, he must demonstrate collateral

consequences to avoid mootness doctrine). Accordingly, this matter is due to be dismissed. Khader vy. Holder, 843 F. Supp. 2d 1202, 1202 (N.D. Ala. 2011). Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the material in the court file, including the report and recommendation, and the objections thereto, the court ADOPTS the report of the magistrate judge and ACCEPTS his recommendation as MODIFIED. This court finds that this habeas petition is due to be DISMISSED as MOOT. The court will enter an appropriate order. DONE the 2nd day of October, 2020.

Abs bho tr ABDUL K. KALLON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Devadas v. Barr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/devadas-v-barr-alnd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack