Miller v. Barr

N.D. Alabama

Miller v. Barr

DecidedAugust 28, 2020

Docket4:19-cv-01404

StatusUnknown

This text of Miller v. Barr (Miller 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

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

Pincite

Opinion

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

TESFA MILLER, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 4:19-cv-01404-ACA-SGC ) WILLIAM BARR, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before the court is Tesfa Miller’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 1). The magistrate judge entered a report recommending that the court dismiss the petition without prejudice as premature. (Doc. 23). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to file specific written objections within fourteen days of the entry date of the report. (Id. at 7). The court has not received any timely objections. However, while the report and recommendation was pending before this court, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the petition as moot because the immigration court terminated Mr. Miller’s removal proceedings, and U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (“ICE”) has released Mr. Miller from custody. (Doc. 24). Mr. Miller’s release from ICE custody renders his petition 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.’”’); Soliman v. United States, 296 F.3d 1237, 1242-43 (11th Cir. 2002) (once a habeas petitioner is no longer detained, “no order . . . requiring [his] release into the community awaiting his final removal order could have any effect’). Because Mr. Miller’s release from custody divests this court of subject matter jurisdiction over the case, the court REJECTS the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to dismiss this action on the merits. The court GRANTS Respondents’ motion to dismiss the § 2241 petition as moot and WILL DISMISSS the petition WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court will enter a separate final order in accordance with this memorandum opinion. DONE and ORDERED this August 27, 2020. a __ 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

TESFA MILLER, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 4:19-cv-01404-ACA-SGC ) WILLIAM BARR, et al., ) ) Respondents. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before the court is Tesfa Miller’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 1). The magistrate judge entered a report recommending that the court dismiss the petition without prejudice as premature. (Doc. 23). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to file specific written objections within fourteen days of the entry date of the report. (Id. at 7). The court has not received any timely objections. However, while the report and recommendation was pending before this court, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the petition as moot because the immigration court terminated Mr. Miller’s removal proceedings, and U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (“ICE”) has released Mr. Miller from custody. (Doc. 24). Mr. Miller’s release from ICE custody renders his petition 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.’”’); Soliman v. United States, 296 F.3d 1237, 1242-43 (11th Cir. 2002) (once a habeas petitioner is no longer detained, “no order . . . requiring [his] release into the community awaiting his final removal order could have any effect’). Because Mr. Miller’s release from custody divests this court of subject matter jurisdiction over the case, the court REJECTS the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to dismiss this action on the merits. The court GRANTS Respondents’ motion to dismiss the § 2241 petition as moot and WILL DISMISSS the petition WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court will enter a separate final order in accordance with this memorandum opinion. DONE and ORDERED this August 27, 2020. a __ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

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

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack