Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.

S.D. California

Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.

District Court, S.D. California·Decided March 4, 2026·No. 3:26-cv-01324·Unknown

Opinion

WISKENCIA DESULMA, Case No. 26-cv-01324-BAS-JLB

Petitioner, ORDER: v. (1) GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN DETENTION CENTER, et al., FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF Respondents. No. 2); AND

(2) REQUIRING THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 1)

Petitioner Wiskencia Desulma filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner is self-represented. She claims she is being unlawfully detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a bond determination. (See id.) Petitioner has also filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis attesting Petitioner has no means to pay the $5.00 filing fee. (ECF No. 2.) Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall file the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus without prepayment of the filing fee. I Further, having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. }2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: l. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than March 12, 2026. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the Petition and must }include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. The Government must also address whether Petitioner is a member of the class certified in Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3678485 (C.D. Dec. 18, 2025). 2. No reply by Petitioner is necessary unless requested by the Court. 3. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order. DATED: March 4, 2026 (yatta Baha □□ Hd¢n. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge United States District Court

~_9_

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

WISKENCIA DESULMA, Case No. 26-cv-01324-BAS-JLB

Petitioner, ORDER: v. (1) GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN DETENTION CENTER, et al., FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF Respondents. No. 2); AND

(2) REQUIRING THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 1)

Petitioner Wiskencia Desulma filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner is self-represented. She claims she is being unlawfully detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a bond determination. (See id.) Petitioner has also filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis attesting Petitioner has no means to pay the $5.00 filing fee. (ECF No. 2.) Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall file the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus without prepayment of the filing fee. I Further, having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. }2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: l. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than March 12, 2026. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the Petition and must }include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. The Government must also address whether Petitioner is a member of the class certified in Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3678485 (C.D. Dec. 18, 2025). 2. No reply by Petitioner is necessary unless requested by the Court. 3. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order. DATED: March 4, 2026 (yatta Baha □□ Hd¢n. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge United States District Court

~_9_

Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al., (S.D. Cal. 2026).

Pincite

Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al. (Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related