Rios v. INS

324 F.3d 296, 2003 WL 734159
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 5, 2003
Docket02-40766
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 324 F.3d 296 (Rios v. INS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rios v. INS, 324 F.3d 296, 2003 WL 734159 (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40766 Summary Calendar

MARIO JIMENEZ RIOS,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; JONATHON DOBRE, Warden,

Respondents-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas -------------------- January 28, 2003

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Mario Jimenez Rios, an excludable alien who arrived in the

United States in the 1980 Mariel boatlift from Cuba, appeals the

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition, in which

he challenges his continued detention by the Immigration and

Naturalization Service ("INS"). INS took Rios into custody in

1998 following his state conviction and sentence for attempted

indecency with a child, the latest conviction in his extensive

criminal history within the United States. The record shows that

he has received parole review but has been repeatedly denied No. 02-40766 -2-

release on account of his criminal history and disciplinary

record.

Relying on Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), Rios

contends that his continued detention violates his constitutional

rights. The district court did not err in determining that Rios

is not entitled to relief. See Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 988

F.2d 1437, 1439 (5th Cir. 1993), amended by Gisbert v. U.S. Atty.

Gen., 997 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir. 1993). Although Zadvydas held that

a deportable alien may contest his continued detention in a 28

U.S.C. § 2241 proceeding, the Court distinguished the status of

deportable aliens from that of excludable aliens like Rios. See

Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682, 692-94. Rios's petition is governed

by Gisbert.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Castro-Jiminez v. Bulger
104 F. App'x 440 (Fifth Circuit, 2004)
Baez v. Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement
100 F. App'x 268 (Fifth Circuit, 2004)
Parra-Parra v. Ashcroft
96 F. App'x 178 (Fifth Circuit, 2004)
Sierra v. Romaine
Third Circuit, 2003
Obikanye v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
78 F. App'x 769 (Second Circuit, 2003)
Gonzalez v. Ashcroft
278 F. Supp. 2d 402 (D. New Jersey, 2003)
Quintero v. Bureau of Immigration & Custom Enforcement
71 F. App'x 336 (Fifth Circuit, 2003)
Napoles v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
278 F. Supp. 2d 272 (D. Connecticut, 2003)
Daniel Benitez v. Robert Wallis
402 F.3d 1133 (Eleventh Circuit, 2003)
Benitez v. Wallis
337 F.3d 1289 (Eleventh Circuit, 2003)
Gonzalez-Monterrey v. BICE
Fifth Circuit, 2003
Zheng v. INS
Fifth Circuit, 2003
Zadvydas v. Davis
533 U.S. 678 (Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
324 F.3d 296, 2003 WL 734159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rios-v-ins-ca5-2003.