LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Martinez v. McAleenan
"Luis Martinez ("Petitioner"), a native and citizen of Mexico, has been living in the U.S.since 1990, when he was 12 or 13 years old. Petitioner has been detained in U.S. Immigration andCustoms Enforcement ("ICE") custody since January 16, 2019, allegedly pursuant to a reinstatedorder of removal. (See Petitioner's Letter dated 5/14/19, ECF No. 20.) Petitioner is detained inEssex County Correctional Facility, where he is in conditions identical to those of county jailinmates serving criminal sentences. (See Letter dated 6/12/19, ECF No. 36.) On March 24, 2019,Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus with this Court, arguing that he was never served with anyreinstatement order when he was detained, and nor was his attorney, who for months repeatedlysought the alleged order justifying Mr. Martinez's detention. (ECF No. 1.)
Petitioner filed a First Amended Petition for his writ on April 21, 2019. (ECF No. 7.)Subsequently, on May 13, 2019, Petitioner filed an Order to Show Cause for his immediate releasefrom custody on grounds that he and his counsel had still not received any notice or ordersjustifying his detention, and hence the detention was unconstitutional. (ECF No. 18.) On May 13,2019, the day Petitioner filed his Order to Show Cause in this Court, ICE finally served him andhis counsel with a Notice of Intent/ Decision to Reinstate the Prior Order (Form I-871). (See Letter,ECF No. 20.) Having finally received written notice, Petitioner did not receive a new bond hearing.
On May 28, 2019, I held a Show Cause Hearing to assess the legal basis andconstitutionality of Petitioner’s Detention. (See Docket Entry Dated 5/28/2019.) Following thathearing, I requested that the parties provide additional briefing regarding Petitioner’s writ ofhabeas corpus in light of the fact that a belated Notice of Reinstatement Order had finally beenserved on Petitioner, four months after his initial ICE Detention. (See id.) Both parties timely filedtheir briefs. Presently before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. (ECFNo. 7.) For the following reasons, Petitioner’s Writ is GRANTED."
[Hats way off to Paul O'Dwyer and Cheryl David!]