JOHN E. STEELE, District Judge.
Petitioner Duamiane Phang ("Petitioner"), a native and citizen of Jamaica, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on March 1, 2013 (Doc. 1). At that time, Petitioner had been detained in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody at the Glades County Detention Center in Moore Haven, Florida since July 20, 2012.
Respondent was ordered to show cause why the petition should not be granted (Doc. 5). Respondent filed a response to the petition, arguing that this Court should defer to the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA's") reasonable interpretations of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) and that Petitioner's mandatory detention does not violate due process pursuant to
Subsequent to the response, Petitioner was deported to Jamaica. Thereafter, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the action as moot because Petitioner was no longer in ICE custody (Doc. 9, filed May 30, 2014). Despite being directed to do so (Doc. 10), Petitioner has not responded to the motion to dismiss,
For the reasons set forth in this Order, Respondent's motion to dismiss the petition as moot is
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Jamaica (Doc. 7-1 at 2). He entered the United States as a lawful permanent resident on March 7, 1996. Id. On August 7, 200, Petitioner was convicted of possession of Methylenedioxymethamphetamine ("MDMA") in violation of Florida Statute §§ 893.13(6)(a) and 893.03(1)(a)(A)(38) and of possession of cocaine with intent to sell, manufacture, or deliver in violation of Florida Statute §§ 893.13(1)(a)(1) and 893.03(20(a)(4). Id. Petitioner was sentenced to five years of probation. Id.
Petitioner was arrested for possession of a firearm or ammunition on July 21, 2012 (Doc. 7-1 at 15). Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") took Petitioner into custody on July 25, 2012 (Doc. 7-1 at 17). On the same day, Petitioner was served with a Notice to Appear ("NTA") charging him with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) for being convicted of an offense relating to a controlled substance, based on his August 7, 2008 convictions (Doc. 7-1 at 2). Petitioner was served with a notice of custody determination advising him that he was being detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 (Doc. 7-1 at 19).
Subsequently, an immigration judge found Petitioner removable as charged and ordered his removal to Jamaica (Doc. 9-1 at 8-20). Petitioner appealed the decision, but the BIA dismissed Petitioner's appeal, affirming the immigration judge's finding that Petitioner was removable from the United States based on his criminal conviction for a controlled substance offense and finding that Petitioner was ineligible for cancellation of removal (Doc. 9-1 at 5-6). As a result, authority for Petitioner's detention shifted from 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(3).
Petitioner was removed to Jamaica on July 25, 2013 (Doc. 9; Doc. 9-1 at 22-23).
Petitioner claims that he is entitled to habeas relief based upon the length of his detention by ICE officials without an individualized bond hearing, which he says violates his substantive right to due process (Doc. 1 at 2, 4). Petitioner also asserts, without explanation, that he is not subject to the mandatory detention provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) (Doc. 1 at 2).
Respondent notes that Petitioner challenges only his continued detention, and has filed a motion to dismiss asserting that the petition is moot because, subsequent to the petition's filing, Petitioner was removed to Jamaica (Doc. 9 at 1). Respondent attaches as an exhibit to the motion, Petitioner's detention history which indicates that he was removed on July 25, 2013 (Doc. 9-1 at 22-24).
The Eleventh Circuit has held that a "case is moot when the issues presented are no longer `live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome."
It is undisputed that Petitioner is no longer in ICE custody due to his removal from the United States. Accordingly, to the extent Petitioner seeks release from ICE custody or an individualized bond hearing, the Court can no longer give Petitioner any meaningful relief.
There is a narrow exception to the mootness doctrine for actions that are capable of repetition yet evading review.
The instant case cannot satisfy the narrow exception to the mootness doctrine because Petitioner is no longer being held pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c). The issuance of a final removal order subsequent to Petitioner filing his habeas petition "fundamentally change[d] the procedural posture of the case" and rendered the petition moot.
In accordance with the foregoing, Petitioner's claims that he is being unconstitutionally held and is entitled to an individualized bond hearing are dismissed as moot.
1. Respondents Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, Marc J. Moore, Anthony Aiello, and John Morton are
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's petition as moot (Doc. 9) is
3. The
It is unclear whether Petitioner challenges any of his underlying convictions as predicate offenses for mandatory removal, but he does claim, without explanation, that he is not subject to mandatory detention (Doc. 1 at 2). Because this Court can no longer provide Petitioner any meaningful relief, it is unnecessary to determine whether the holding in