Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
LEVAN ASATIANI,
Petitioner,
v. No. 1:26-cv-00975-KG-SCY
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Levan Asatiani’s pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus, Doc. 1, and the Government’s Motion to Dismiss, Doc. 6. For the reasons below, the
Court denies the petition.
I. Background
Petitioner is a 29-year-old native and citizen of Georgia who lawfully entered the United
States as a temporary Exchange Visitor on February 27, 2023. Doc. 6 at 2. He failed to depart
the United States after his temporary status expired in December 2023. Id. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) arrested him on February 6, 2026. Id. Petitioner remains
detained at the Otero County Processing Center in New Mexico. Id. He received a bond hearing
on March 27, 2026. Id. The Immigration judge (“IJ”) denied Petitioner bond because he did not
“meet his burden of showing that he is not a danger to the community.” Doc. 6-3 at 1.
Petitioner challenges his detention and bond denial, arguing that he has not received “a
meaningful individualized determination justifying his confinement.” Doc. 1 at 7. In its motion
to dismiss, the Government argues that because “Petitioner requested and received a bond
hearing” his rights are satisfied under 8 U.S.C. § 1226. Doc. 6 at 5.
Case 1:26-cv-00975-KG-SCY Document 8 Filed 05/14/26 Page 1 of 2

2
II. Analysis
The Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) establishes distinct detention regimes
depending on whether a noncitizen is “seeking admission” to the United States. See Jennings v.
Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 288–89 (2018). Relevant here, § 1226(a) authorizes the arrest and
detention, “on a warrant issued by the Attorney General,” of noncitizens “pending a decision on
whether [they are] to be removed.” Noncitizens detained under this second detention regime are
“entitled to individualized bond hearings at the outset of detention.” Velasquez Salazar, 806 F.
Supp. 3d 1231, 1239 (D.N.M. 2025).
The Court declines to grant relief because Petitioner received a bond hearing on March
27, 2026. See Doc. 6-3. At that hearing, the IJ considered the record and found that Petitioner
failed to carry his burden of showing he is not a danger to the community. Id. at 1. That is all
§ 1226 requires. To the extent Petitioner challenges the IJ’s discretionary denial of bond, that
challenge is properly directed to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
III. Conclusion
The Court denies the Petition, Doc. 1, and grants the Government’s Motion to Dismiss,
Doc. 6.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
• Please note that this document has been
electronically filed. To verify its
authenticity, please refer to the Digital File
Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic
Filing) accompanying this document.
Electronically filed documents can be found
on the Court’s PACER public access
system.
Case 1:26-cv-00975-KG-SCY Document 8 Filed 05/14/26 Page 2 of 2