Mora-Rueda v. Chandler, et al

03-40094Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitNov 19, 2003

Full text

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
November 19, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-40094
Summary Calendar
JUAN ALBERTO MORA-RUEDA,
Petitioner-
Appellant,
versus
BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT;
JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL;
ERNEST CHANDLER, Warden,
Respondents-Appellees.
----------------------------------------------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:01-CV-581
---------------------------------------------------------
Before SMITH, DEMOSS and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Alberto Mora-Rueda, immigration detainee # 00125-129, appeals the district court’s
denial of his 21 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the right of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service to detain him indefinitely in light of the Supreme Court decision in Zadvydas
v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). Mora-Rueda is an excludable alien who is a Cuban national.

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
In Zadvydas, the Supreme Court set up a framework in which a deportable alien could
establish the unreasonableness of his continued detention and obtain his release, albeit supervised, in
a habeas corpus proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Id. at 701. Mora-Rueda’s argument that
Zadvydas should apply equally to excludable aliens like himself is foreclosed by this court’s decision
in Rios v. INS, 324 F.3d 296, 296 (5th Cir. 2003). Instead, this court’s holding in Gisbert v. U.S.
Atty. Gen., 988 F.2d 1437, 1440-47 (5th Cir.), amended by Gisbert v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 997 F.2d
1122 (5th Cir. 1993), that there are no time limits on the detention of excluded aliens who have been
denied entry, governs Mora-Rueda’s petition. See Rios, 324 F.3d at 296. The district court did not
err in denying the petition.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.