Godoy Bermudez v. Raycraft et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
BENI GODOY BERMUDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
KEVIN RAYCRAFT et al.,
Respondents.
____________________________/
Case No. 1:26-cv-608
Honorable Jane M. Beckering
OPINION
Petitioner, a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainee currently
detained at the North Lake Processing Center located in Baldwin, Lake County, Michigan, initiated
this action by filing a counseled petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
(Pet., ECF No. 1.) For the following reasons, the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s petition
for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
I. 	Procedural History
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of his current
detention following an order issued by the Detroit Immigration Court denying him bond, and asks
the Court to, inter alia, issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering Respondents to release Petitioner or
provide Petitioner with a bond hearing where the government bears the burden of proof by clear
and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a flight risk or danger to the community. (Pet., ECF
No. 1, PageID.6–7.)
In an Order entered on February 26, 2026, the Court directed Respondents to show cause,
within three business days, why the writ of habeas corpus and other relief requested by Petitioner
Case 1:26-cv-00608-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 03/06/26 Page 1
of 3

2
should not be granted. (Order, ECF No. 4.) Respondents filed their response on February 27, 2026
(ECF No. 5), and Petitioner filed his reply on March 4, 2026 (ECF No. 6).
II. 	Relevant Factual Background
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Honduras who entered the United States on July 9,
2023. (Wanogho Decl. ¶ 4, ECF No. 5-1, PageID.28.) On November 4, 2025, Petitioner filed a
§ 2241 petition challenging his initial detention without a bond hearing in Godoy Bermudez v.
Lynch (Godoy Bermudez I), No. 1:25-cv-1357 (W.D. Mich.). In Godoy Bermudez I, the Court
conditionally granted Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241,
ordering Respondents to provide Petitioner with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within
five business days of the date of the Court’s Opinion and Judgment or, in the alternative,
immediately release Petitioner from custody. Op. & Jud., Godoy Bermudez I, (W.D. Mich. Nov.
24, 2025), (ECF Nos. 6, 7).
On November 26, 2025, Petitioner received a bond hearing pursuant to § 1226(a). (Pet.,
ECF No. 1, PageID.4.) At that hearing, “Petitioner argued that he was not a danger to the
community or a flight risk because he had no criminal record, had work authorization and a
pending asylum application, had extensive family ties in the Detroit area, and had lived in the U.S.
for over two years.” (Id.) “The government presented no evidence, either to rebut these claims or
to show that [Petitioner] was a danger to the community or a flight risk.” (Id.) At the conclusion
of the hearing, the Immigration Judge (IJ) denied Petitioner’s request for bond because Petitioner
“has not established that he does not pose a flight risk.” (Order of the IJ, ECF No. 1, PageID.10.)
III. 	Discussion
Respondents argue that the Court should deny Petitioner’s § 2241 petition due to a lack of
jurisdiction and Petitioner’s failure to exhaust Petitioner’s administrative remedies, as well as on
the merits. The Court has fully addressed these issues and Respondents’ arguments in Soto-Medina
Case 1:26-cv-00608-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 03/06/26 Page 2
of 3

3
v. Lynch et al., No. 1:25-cv-1704 (W.D. Mich. Jan. 21, 2026). Therefore, for the reasons set forth
in Soto-Medina, the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
IV. 	Other Claims and Other Forms of Relief
Because the Court will conditionally grant Petitioner’s § 2241 petition as set forth herein,
the Court does not address other claims and other requested relief in Petitioner’s § 2241 petition.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, the Court will enter a Judgment conditionally granting
Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) The
Court will order Respondents to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an
immigration judge, at which time the government will have the burden to demonstrate
dangerousness or flight risk by clear and convincing evidence, within five business days and with
notice to the Parties as soon as practicable, no later than 24 hours prior to the scheduled hearing,
or, in the alternative, immediately release Petitioner from custody. The Court will also order
Respondents to file a status report within six business days of the date of this Court’s Opinion and
Judgment to certify compliance with this Opinion and the corresponding Judgment. The status
report shall include if and when the bond hearing occurred, if bond was granted or denied, and if
bond was granted, the conditions of the bond, or if bond was denied, the reasons for the denial.
Dated: 	March 6, 2026 	/s/ Jane M. Beckering
Jane M. Beckering
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-00608-JMB-MV ECF No. 7, PageID.<pageID> Filed 03/06/26 Page 3
of 3