Perez-Ramirez v. Norwood

322 F. Supp. 3d 1169
CourtDistrict Court, D. Kansas
DecidedJuly 18, 2018
DocketCASE NO. 18-4043-JWL
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 322 F. Supp. 3d 1169 (Perez-Ramirez v. Norwood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Perez-Ramirez v. Norwood, 322 F. Supp. 3d 1169 (D. Kan. 2018).

Opinion

JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, U.S. District Judge *1170This matter is a petition for habeas corpus filed by an alien detainee confined at the Shawnee County Jail, Topeka, Kansas. The United States removed this action on June 5, 2018.

Petitioner challenges his detention by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) pending a determination of his removal and seeks immediate release, damages, and other relief.

Background

Petitioner is a native of Guatemala who entered the United States in or around March 2003.

On May 4, 2017, he was questioned by the Topeka Police Department and released pending the results of an investigation. Prior to his release, he was interviewed by an ICE agent who concluded he was subject to removal. On the same day, ICE issued a Warrant for Arrest of Alien, a Notice of Custody Determination, and a Notice to Appear in removal proceedings. Petitioner was served and booked into the Shawnee County Jail as an ICE inmate under that warrant.

On June 20, 2017, an immigration judge released petitioner on bond.

On December 8, 2017, a grand jury in the District Court of Shawnee County indicted petitioner on charges of rape and aggravated sexual battery.

On January 5, 2018, Topeka police took petitioner into custody under that indictment. On the same day, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lodged an immigration detainer with the Shawnee County Department of Corrections (DOC). The detainer requested notice of petitioner's release and requested that the DOC retain custody for a period of no more than 48 hours to allow DHS to assume custody of petitioner.

On January 10, 2018, DHS cancelled petitioner's immigration bond. On the same day, petitioner entered guilty pleas to two counts of sexual battery.

On May 14, 2018, petitioner was sentenced to 24 months of supervised probation. On that day, the DOC notified Matthew Roberts, a Deportation Officer at the Enforcement and Removal Office (ERO) in Kansas City, Missouri, of petitioner's sentence and that he would remain in custody under the ICE detainer.

On May 16, 2018, Roberts, through an interpreter, explained to petitioner the ICE Notice of Custody Determination form and his re-determination to no bond status. Petitioner stated that he wished to see an immigration judge to review this determination and signed the form to request such review.

On June 5, 2018, a hearing was conducted and DHS added an additional ground for petitioner's removal based upon his recent Shawnee County conviction. Petitioner's immigration attorney was granted a continuance to allow him to respond to the additional ground for removal. On the same day, the United States removed this action to this court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) and § 1446.

Petitioner remains detained in the Shawnee County Jail in ICE custody.

*1171Analysis

The general habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2241, provides that "[w]rits of habeas corpus may be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts, and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions...." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a). This remedy is available where the petitioner demonstrates that he is "in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3).

The federal courts have jurisdiction to consider habeas corpus claims by aliens who challenge the constitutionality of their detention. Demore v. Kim , 538 U.S. 510, 516-17, 123 S.Ct. 1708, 155 L.Ed.2d 724 (2003).

The federal government has "broad, undoubted power over the subject of immigration and the status of aliens." Arizona v. United States , 567 U.S. 387, 394, 132 S.Ct. 2492, 183 L.Ed.2d 351 (2012). Congress, through the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), has authorized the DHS, through ICE, to enforce immigration law.

The INA authorizes the United States Attorney General to interview, arrest, and detain removable aliens already in the country pending a decision in removal proceedings. 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).

In aid of this authority, Congress authorized the DHS to enter agreements with State and local authorities to assist in specific enforcement activity, including detention. See 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g) (authorizing cooperative agreements) and 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(11)(A) (11)(A) (authorizing payments by the Attorney General for expenses of persons in administrative detention in non-Federal institutions). Petitioner is housed in the Shawnee County Jail under an agreement between ICE and the Shawnee County DOC. See Doc. # 11, Attach. A, Ex. 9, pp. 20-28.

Among the methods the federal government uses to seek the cooperation of state and local authorities is the issuance of an immigration detainer. An immigration detainer provides notice to such authorities that ICE intends to take custody of a removable alien upon that person's release from the jurisdiction's custody. By issuing the detainer, ICE seeks notice of the release date and a hold upon the alien for up to 48 hours. 8 C.F.R.

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

Related

Hernandez v. United States
939 F.3d 191 (Second Circuit, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
322 F. Supp. 3d 1169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-ramirez-v-norwood-ksd-2018.