Filed: Apr. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 25, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2241 ROGER T. BENITEZ , District Judge . Petitioner Domingos Jose Ramos Oliveira has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. (Docket No. 1.) In short, Petitioner's petition ask the Court to order his release at a more reasonable amount of bond 1 pending the results of his removal proceedings. The Court takes judicial notice that, on January 31, 2018, while Petitioner's petition was
Summary: ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2241 ROGER T. BENITEZ , District Judge . Petitioner Domingos Jose Ramos Oliveira has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. (Docket No. 1.) In short, Petitioner's petition ask the Court to order his release at a more reasonable amount of bond 1 pending the results of his removal proceedings. The Court takes judicial notice that, on January 31, 2018, while Petitioner's petition was p..
More
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2241
ROGER T. BENITEZ, District Judge.
Petitioner Domingos Jose Ramos Oliveira has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Docket No. 1.) In short, Petitioner's petition ask the Court to order his release at a more reasonable amount of bond1 pending the results of his removal proceedings.
The Court takes judicial notice that, on January 31, 2018, while Petitioner's petition was pending, the Immigration Judge set his bond to $50,000. (Docket No. 6-1 at p. 2, January 31, 2018 Order of the Immigration Judge With Respect to Custody.) The Court also takes judicial notice that as of March 2, 2018, Petitioner's bond had been paid and Petitioner was released pending the final decision in his exclusion/deportation hearing. (Docket No. 6-1 at p. 3, Notice of Release and Proof of Service.)
As a result, Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition is moot because it does not appear there are any "remaining `collateral conseconsequence[s]' that may be redressed by success on the petition."2 Abdala v. I.N.S., 488 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)). Therefore, Petitioner's petition is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
