Roa Sanchez v. Raycraft et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
CARLOS ENRIQUE ROA SANCHEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
KEVIN RAYCRAFT et al.,
Respondents.
____________________________/
Case No. 1:26-cv-1156
Hon. Hala Y. Jarbou
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 a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(Pet., ECF No. 1.) For the following reasons, the Court will dismiss Petitioner’s petition for a writ
of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 without prejudice.
Discussion
I. Procedural History
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, Petitioner challenges the lawfulness of his current detention
and asks the Court to, inter alia, issue a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 either
ordering Respondents to release Petitioner or ordering Respondents to conduct a bond hearing to
satisfy the requirements of due process. (Pet., ECF No. 1, PageID.12.) In an order entered on April
10, 2026, the Court directed Respondents to show cause, within three business days, why the writ
of habeas corpus and other relief requested by Petitioner should not be granted. (Order, ECF
Case 1:26-cv-01156-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/05/26 Page 1
of 4

2
No. 3.) Respondents filed their response on April 14, 2026, (ECF No. 4), and Petitioner filed his
reply on April 17, 2026, (ECF No. 5).
II. Factual Background
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Venezuela. (Notice to Appear (NTA), ECF No. 4-1,
PageID.71.) Petitioner entered the United States on or about June 8, 2023, at or near Eagle Pass,
Texas, without inspection. (Id.) After Petitioner entered the United States, Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) agents encountered Petitioner, and at that time, DHS issued Petitioner
a Form I-862, NTA, charging Petitioner with inadmissibility under § 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) because Petitioner is an immigrant “present in the United
States without being admitted or paroled, or who entered into the United States at any time or place
other than as designated by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.” (Id.; 2023
Form I-213, ECF No. 4-2, PageID.77.) DHS then released Petitioner into the United States on his
own recognizance “[i]n accordance with section 236 of the [INA],” which is codified at 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226. (Order Release Recognizance, ECF No. 4-4, PageID.83.)
On February 16, 2026, ICE agents encountered and arrested Petitioner. (2026 Form I-213,
ECF No. 4-5, PageID.87.) On March 26, 2026, the Detroit Immigration Court entered an order
denying Petitioner’s request for a custody redetermination hearing because it lacked jurisdiction
over that request. (Mar. 2026 Order Immigration Judge, ECF No. 4-7, PageID.94.)
On April 3, 2026, Katherine Rodriguez Lujano filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on behalf of Petitioner as his next friend. Pet., Rodriguez
Lujano v. Unknown Party #1, 1:26-cv-1102 (W.D. Mich. Apr. 3, 2026), (ECF No 1). In Rodriguez
Lujano, the Court conditionally granted the 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
Case 1:26-cv-01156-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/05/26 Page 2
of 4

3
alternative, immediately release Petitioner from custody. Op. & J., Rodriguez Lujano, (W.D. Mich.
Apr. 21, 2026), (ECF Nos. 5, 6).
On April 27, 2026, Petitioner received a bond hearing pursuant to § 1226(a). Status Report,
Rodriguez Lujano, (W.D. Mich. Apr. 28, 2026), (ECF No. 8.) At the conclusion of the April 27,
2026, hearing, the Immigration Judge granted Petitioner’s request for a custody redetermination
and ordered that Petitioner be released on his own recognizance. Apr. 2026 Order Immigration
Judge, Rodriguez Lujano, (W.D. Mich. Apr. 28, 2026), (ECF No. 8-1).
III. Legal Standard
The Constitution guarantees that the writ of habeas corpus is “available to every individual
detained within the United States.” Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525 (2004) (citing U.S.
Const., Art I, § 9, cl. 2). Section 2241 of Title 28 confers the federal courts with the power to issue
writs of habeas corpus to persons “in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of
the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This includes challenges by non-citizens in immigration-
related matters. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 687 (2001); see also A. A. R. P. v. Trump,
145 S. Ct. 1364, 1367 (2025).
“Under Article III of the United States Constitution, federal courts have the power to
adjudicate only ‘Cases’ and ‘Controversies.’” Cal. Palms Addiction Recovery Campus, Inc. v.
United States, 158 F.4th 726, 730 (6th Cir. 2025) (quoting Mokdad v. Sessions, 876 F.3d 167, 169
(6th Cir. 2017)). “Part of what Article III requires is that there be a live case or controversy—
‘when the issues presented are no longer live or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the
outcome,’ a case becomes moot.” Id. (some internal quotations omitted) (citation omitted). “When
the case-and-controversy requirement is not satisfied, federal courts lack subject-matter
jurisdiction.” Id. (citing Mokdad, 876 F.3d at 170.)
Case 1:26-cv-01156-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/05/26 Page 3
of 4

4
IV. Discussion
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, he contends that Respondents are subjecting him to
mandatory detention under § 1225, and Petitioner requests that the Court enter an order directing
Respondents to release Petitioner from custody unless Respondents provide Petitioner with a bond
hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226. (Pet., ECF No. 1, PageID.12.)
Since Petitioner submitted the present § 2241 petition, he received a bond hearing in the
Detroit Immigration Court pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226, at which time the Immigration Judge
ordered that Petitioner be released on his own recognizance. Apr. 2026 Order Immigration Judge,
Rodriguez Lujano, (W.D. Mich. Apr. 28, 2026), (ECF No. 8-1). Accordingly, because Petitioner
received a bond hearing in the Detroit Immigration Court and the Immigration Judge ordered that
Respondents release Petitioner, which was the relief Petitioner sought in the instant § 2241
petition, the Court will dismiss the action without prejudice.
Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, the Court will enter a judgment dismissing Petitioner’s
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 without prejudice.
Dated: May 5, 2026 /s/ Hala Y. Jarbou
HALA Y. JARBOU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:26-cv-01156-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 05/05/26 Page 4
of 4