Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pulido v. Sessions

United States District Court, N.D. California

November 21, 2017

JOSE GUTIERREZ PULIDO, Petitioner,
v.
JEFF SESSIONS, U.S. Attorney General; ELAINE DUKE, Secretary of Homeland Security; JUAN OSUNA, Acting Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review; ROBIN BARRETT, San Francisco ICE Field Office Director, Respondents.

          ORDER RE SECTION 2241 PETITION

          WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         INTRODUCTION

         In this Section 2241 action, petitioner seeks a bond hearing. Respondent opposes. For the reasons herein, petitioner's motion is Granted.

         STATEMENT

         Petitioner Jose Gutierrez Pulido is a Mexican citizen being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the West County Detention Facility in Richmond, California (Dkt. No. 1 at ¶¶ 1, 4).

         In September 2016, ICE arrested Pulido for illegally re-entering the United States after a previous removal. Pulido had been removed from the United States on four prior occasions for illegal entry, once in 2004, and three times in 2008 (Dkt. No. 9-1 ¶¶ 3-4).

         Following his 2016 arrest, ICE reinstated his removal order and took Pulido into custody. While in custody, Pulido claimed that he feared for his life should he be returned to Mexico, and sought to prevent his removal on that ground. Based on his claim, ICE referred Pulido to an asylum pre-screening officer, to conduct a “reasonable fear” interview (Gallant Decl. ¶¶ 5, 7, 8; Exhs. B, C).

         The Asylum Officer found that Pulido had a reasonable fear of persecution, and, pursuant to Section 208.31 of Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations referred Pulido's case to an immigration judge to conduct “withholding-only” proceedings through which Pulido could apply for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Based upon a review of his file - which revealed a significant criminal history, and four previous illegal entries into the United States - ICE determined that Pulido would continue to be detained while he was awaiting a hearing on his application for withholding of removal (id. ¶¶ 9-10, 16 Exhs. C, F).

         After seeking numerous continuances, Pulido eventually appeared before an immigration judge on May 23, 2017, for a review of his withholding of removal application. On June 7, 2017, the immigration judge denied Pulido's application for withholding of removal (id. ¶¶ 11-14; Exhs. H).

         At the May 23 hearing, Pulido also moved for a bond hearing, which motion the immigration judge denied, finding that he lacked jurisdiction to conduct a bond hearing (ibid.).

         Pulido timely appealed both decisions, and those appeals remain pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals. He remains in custody, and to date has not had a bond hearing (id. ¶ 15 Exh. I).

         Pulido now moves for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Section 2241, challenging his denial of a bond hearing. He claims that his prolonged detention without a bond hearing violates the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Fifth Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses, and seeks an order granting a bond hearing before another immigration judge or a district or magistrate judge in the United States District Court. Respondents oppose Pulido's motion arguing that he has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies so the issue is not ripe, and that even if he had met the exhaustion requirement, he is not entitled to a bond hearing under the applicable law.

         ANALYSIS

         1. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.