Hernandez Amado v. Moniz et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
OTTO RAUL HERNANDEZ AMADO,
Petitioner,
*
*
*
*
*
Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-13458-IT
v. 	*
*
ANTONE MONIZ, Superintendent of
Plymouth County Correctional Facility;
PATRICIA HYDE, Boston Field Office
Director, U.S. Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement; TODD LYONS, Acting
Director, U.S. Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement; and KRISTI NOEM, U.S.
Secretary of Homeland Security,
Respondents.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
November 25, 2025
TALWANI, D.J.
Petitioner Otto Raul Hernandez Amado is a Guatemalan national who has been present in
the United States for an unspecified amount of time. Pet. Ex. 1 at 1 [Doc. No. 1-1]. Petitioner
alleges, and Respondents do not contest, that on October 22, 2025, federal immigration officials
arrested Petitioner and placed him in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(“ICE”). Pet. ¶ 2. Petitioner is currently detained at the Plymouth County Correctional Facility in
Plymouth, MA. Id. ¶ 1.
On November 13. 2025, Petitioner requested a bond hearing before the Immigration
Judge. Pet. Ex. 2 CM/ECF p. 1 [Doc. 1-2]. The Immigration Judge found that Petitioner was
subject to mandatory detention, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225, and declined to conduct a bond
hearing. Id. On November 19, 2025, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc.
Case 1:25-cv-13458-IT Document 10 Filed 11/25/25 Page 1 of 3

2
No. 1] with this court. Petitioner contends that, because of his residence within the United States,
Petitioner is subject to detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which requires, upon request, “a
custody redetermination hearing (colloquially called a ‘bond hearing’)[.]” Id. ¶ 11.
Respondents concede that “the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those
recently addressed by this Court in Doe v. Moniz, __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2025 WL 2576819 (D.
Mass. Sept. 5, 2025), Elias Escobar v. Hyde, 2025 WL 2823324 (D. Mass. Oct. 3, 2025), Da
Silva v. Hyde No. 25-cv-12638-IT (D. Mass. Oct. 7, 2025); Venancio v. Hyde, No. 25-cv-12616-
IT (D. Mass. Oct. 9, 2025); and Caguana-Caguana v. Moniz; __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2025 WL
3171043 (D. Mass. Nov. 13, 2025).” Resp. 1 [Doc. No. 9] (cleaned up).
Though Respondents note their disagreement with these decisions, Respondents
acknowledge that, “[s]hould the Court follow its reasoning in Doe, [Elias] Escobar, Da Silva,
Venancio, and Caguana-Caguana, it would reach the same result here.” Id.
Nothing in the record indicates that Petitioner was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225 rather
than 8 U.S.C. § 1226. The court finds the reasoning in Doe remains correct and that Petitioner’s
detention is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in
Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025), is unpersuasive and does not change
the analysis. See Elias Escobar, 2025 WL 2823324, at *3 (D. Mass. Oct. 20, 2025) (citing cases
reaching the same conclusion).
Accordingly, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 1] is GRANTED as
follows. No later than December 2, 2025, Hernandez Amado must be provided a bond hearing
pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226 or, if the immigration judge again declines to conduct a bond
hearing based on Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025), Respondents shall so
advise the court by that date so that this court may conduct the bond hearing. Any decision by
Case 1:25-cv-13458-IT Document 10 Filed 11/25/25 Page 2 of 3

3
the immigration judge to retain Hernandez Amado in custody following a bond hearing pursuant
to 8 U.S.C. § 1226 shall set forth the reasons for the continued detention.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 25, 2025 	/s/ Indira Talwani
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-13458-IT Document 10 Filed 11/25/25 Page 3 of 3