Charmell Ampie v. Mullin et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
DEIVID CHARMELL AMPIE,
Petitioner,
v.
MATTHEW PUTRA et al.,
Respondents.
____________________________/
Case No. 1:26-cv-2849
Honorable Jane M. Beckering
OPINION
Petitioner, a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), initiated this
action by filing a 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 conditionally grant Petitioner’s petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Discussion
I. 	Procedural History
In Petitioner’s § 2241 petition, he 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 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 ordering Respondents to
release Petitioner. (Pet., ECF No. 1, PageID.14.) In an order entered on October 7, 2026, the Court
directed Respondents to show cause, within three business days, why the writ of habeas corpus
should not be granted. (Order, ECF No. 3.) Respondents filed their response and a recording of the
September 15, 2026, bond hearing on October 13, 2026, (Resp., ECF No. 4; Recording of Sep. 15,
Case 1:26-cv-02849-JMB-SJB ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/16/26 Page 1
of 3

2
2026, Bond Hearing, filed on Oct. 13, 2026), and Petitioner filed his reply on October 16, 2026,
(ECF No. 5).
II. 	Relevant Factual Background
Petitioner is a native and citizen of Venezuela who entered the United States in 2022. (2026
Notice to Appear (NTA), ECF No. 4-6, PageID.50.) On July 31, 2026, ICE agents arrested
Petitioner. (2026 Form I-213, ECF No. 4-5, PageID.47.)
On September 15, 2026, Petitioner received a bond hearing pursuant to § 1226(a). (Sep.
14, 2026, Immigration Judge Order, ECF No. 4-7, PageID.54.) During the hearing, the
Immigration Judge confirmed that the burden of proof was on Petitioner “through the, um, statute
and regulations” and because there was no order from the district court indicating otherwise.
(Recording of Sep. 15, 2026, Bond Hearing, at 2:10–2:30, filed on Oct. 13, 2026). At the
conclusion of that hearing, the immigration judge denied Petitioner’s request for bond, stating only
“Flight risk.” (Sep. 14, 2026, Immigration Judge Order, ECF No. 4-7, PageID.54.)
III. 	Analysis
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
v. Lynch, 817 F. Supp. 3d 612 (W.D. Mich. 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.
Case 1:26-cv-02849-JMB-SJB ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/16/26 Page 2
of 3

3
Conclusion
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: 	October 16, 2026 	/s/ Jane M. Beckering
Jane M. Beckering
United States District Judge
Case 1:26-cv-02849-JMB-SJB ECF No. 6, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/16/26 Page 3
of 3