Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
MANUEL ARIOLFO CHUCHUCA-CABRERA,
Petitioner,
v. No. 26-cv-0449-MIS-DLM
WARDEN CASTRO, Otero County
Processing Center; MARY DE ANDA-
YBARRA, Field Office Director of
Enforcement and Removal Operations, El
Paso Field Office, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; TODD LYONS, Acting
Director Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; KRISTI NOEM, Secretary,
U.S. Department Of Homeland Security; and
PAMELA BONDI, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondents.
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner Manuel Ariolfo Chuchuca-Cabrera’s pro
se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, ECF No. 1, and Memorandum of
Law in Support thereof, ECF No. 3 (collectively, “Petition”), filed February 17, 2026. On
February 18, 2026, the Clerk’s Office served Respondents with the Petition, pursuant to this
District’s Standing Order Regarding Service of Process in Immigration Habeas Petitions filed
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Case 1:26-mc-00004, ECF No. 3 (D.N.M. Jan. 28, 2026). ECF No.
5.
On February 19, 2026, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 7, which
instructs that Respondents “shall respond to the Petition and show cause why the requested relief
should not be granted” within ten business days. Id. at 2. The Order reminds Respondents “that
this Court has already decided the issues presented by the Petition and granted the relief Petitioner
Case 2:26-cv-00449-MIS-DLM Document 10 Filed 03/06/26 Page 1 of 3

2
requests here[,]” id. (citations omitted), and instructs that “[a]ny response filed by Respondents
must therefore demonstrate that the facts of this case warrant a departure from the Court’s prior
rulings[,]” id. at 3.
On March 5, 2026, the federal Respondents filed a Response to the Petition. ECF No. 9.
Therein, counsel for Respondents acknowledges that the facts of this case are “substantially
similar” to Duhan v. Noem, No. 2:26-cv-00019-MIS-JFR, 2026 WL 266619 (D.N.M. Feb. 2,
2026), id. at 2, and that “this Court’s decision in Duhan v. Noem, would control the result here if
the Court adheres to that decision, as the facts are not materially distinguishable for purposes of
the Court’s decision on the legal issue of which statutory provision authorizes Petitioner’s
detention[,]” id. Counsel did not distinguish this case from other cases involving the detention of
noncitizens already present in the United States—as opposed to noncitizens detained at a border
crossing or port of entry—but argued that Petitioner is an applicant for admission seeking
admission subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). Id. at 2-3.
The Court finds that the facts of this case are materially indistinguishable from prior cases
the Undersigned Judge has decided involving habeas petitioners who were detained within the
United States, rather than at a border crossing or port of entry, and adopts the findings contained
in its Order Granting the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in Lopez-Romero v. Lyons, Case No.
2:25-cv-0113-MIS-JHR, 2026 WL 92873 (D.N.M. Jan. 13, 2026). Briefly, the Court finds that 8
U.S.C. § 1226(a) governs Petitioner’s detention, his continued detention without a bond hearing
violates his Fifth Amendment right to due process, and, as such, he is entitled to habeas relief.
The Court further finds that Respondents failed to articulate a legitimate interest in Petitioner’s
continued detention and therefore orders his immediate release. See generally Resp., ECF No. 9.
The Court further orders that Petitioner shall not be re-detained without a pre-deprivation
Case 2:26-cv-00449-MIS-DLM Document 10 Filed 03/06/26 Page 2 of 3

3
bond hearing before a neutral Immigration Judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the
Government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a danger or flight
risk. Finally, the Court retains jurisdiction to ensure compliance with its Order.
Therefore, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF Nos. 1, 3, is GRANTED;
2. Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release Petitioner Manuel Ariolfo
Chuchuca-Cabrera from custody/detention without restraints beyond those that
existed before his unlawful detention;
3. Respondents SHALL RETURN all personal belongings to Petitioner and provide
him with all necessary documents sufficient to board and travel by commercial
domestic air;
4. Respondents SHALL NOT re-detain Petitioner without a pre-deprivation hearing
before a neutral Immigration Judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the
Government must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner is a
danger or flight risk;
5. Respondents SHALL file a Notice of Compliance with this Order as soon as
practicable after Petitioner’s release;
6. The Court will separately enter Final Judgment in favor of Petitioner but retain
jurisdiction over this matter to ensure compliance with this Order.
………………………………………….
MARGARET STRICKLAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-00449-MIS-DLM Document 10 Filed 03/06/26 Page 3 of 3