1:26-cv-14325•Moreno Sam v. Wesling et al
Full text
United States District Court
District of Massachusetts
Juan Moreno Sam,
Petitioner ,
v.
David Wesling , et al .,
Respondents .
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.
26-14325-NMG
--------------------
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
GORTON, J.
This case arises from the petition for writ of habeas
corpus (Docket No . 1) of petitioner Juan Moreno Sam ("Moreno
Sam" or "petitioner"). Moreno Sam asserts that his arrest and
detention by David Wesl i ng and the other named respondents
("respondents") violate his statutory, regulatory , and due
process rights as a non - citizen and seeks i mmedia t e release from
custody.
Petitioner , a citizen of Guatemala , avers that he was
arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (" ICE " ) o f ficers
in New Bedford , Massachusetts , on or about September 22 , 2026 .
He claims that the ICE officers presented no warrant , gave no
explanation for his arrest and made no inquiry into whether he
was likely to escape before a warrant co ul d be obtained .
- 1 -
Case 1:26-cv-14325-NMG Document 7 Filed 10/08/26 Page 1 of 3Respondents do not address the circumstances of
petitioner's arrest. Rather, they maintain that he is subject
to a final order of removal and that, as a result, his current
detention is mandatory and the Court lacks jurisdiction to
enjoin the execution of that order. See 8 U.S. C. §12 52 ( g) (" [N] o
court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or
on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by
the Attorney General to . execute removal orders against any
alien"); 8 U.S.C. §1231(a) (2) (A) ("During the removal period, the
Attorney General shall detain the alien").
Respondents' submissions demonstrate that petitioner was
ordered removed under 8 U.S.C. §1225(b) (1) on April 2, 2016, and
then was removed from the country on April 7, 2016. Petitioner
re-entered the country on or about May 8, 2016, whereupon the
previous order for removal was reinstated, and he was removed
again on May 13, 2016. Petitioner re-entered the country a
third time on an unknown date thereafter. On September 22,
2026, the date of petitioner's arrest, ICE reinstated the 2016
order of removal and contemporaneously issued a warrant for his
removal.
Regardless of whether the initial stop and arrest of
petitioner was lawful, in light of the above, the Court
concludes that the relief sought by petitioner is unavailable
under the circumstances of this case.
- 2 -
Case 1:26-cv-14325-NMG Document 7 Filed 10/08/26 Page 2 of 3It is well settled that habeas relief extends to petitioners who are in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. §2241(c) (3). Here, it is undisputed that Moreno Sam's prior removal order was reinstated on the day of his arrest, thereby requiring ICE to detain him pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1231 (a) (2) (A). Thus, even if the Court were to assume, without deciding, that the stop and arrest were unlawful, petitioner has not established that his current detention violates the Constitution or governing law. Cf. INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032, 1039 (1984) (explaining that the identity of a detainee "is never itself suppressible as a fruit of an unlawful arrest," even when it is conceded that an unlawful arrest occurred). Furthermore, because the petition fails on the merits, the Court need not address respondents' contention that 8 U.S.C. §1252(g) deprives it of jurisdiction. ORDER For the foregoing reasons, the petition for writ of habeas corpus (Docket No. 1) is DENIED. t1a#!~~~ NathanieiM.d¥ ton Senior United States District Judge Dated: October 8' , 2026 - 3 - Case 1:26-cv-14325-NMG Document 7 Filed 10/08/26 Page 3 of 3
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.