Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
FRANK MARTINEZ ALVAREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
Case No. 2:26-cv-00990-MIS-SCY
TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General
of the United States; MARKWAYNE
MULLIN, Secretary of the Department of
Homeland Security; TODD LYONS, Acting
Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA,
Field Office Director, ICE El Paso Field
Office; WARDEN, Otero County Processing
Center,
Respondents.
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner Frank Martinez Alvarez’s pro se Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”), ECF No. 1, Memorandum of Law in Support thereof, ECF
No. 2, and Declaration of Frank Martinez Alvarez (“Martinez Decl.”), ECF No. 3, filed April 1,
2026. On April 14, 2026, the federal Respondents filed a Response. ECF No. 9. Upon review of
the Parties’ submissions, the record, and the relevant law, the Court will DENY the Petition without
prejudice.
I. Background
Petitioner is an immigration detainee at the Otero County Processing Center in Chaparral,
New Mexico. See Pet. ¶ 2. He is a native of Cuba who entered the United States in December
2014. Id. ¶ 6. Petitioner is subject to a final order of removal dated October 17, 2022. Id. ¶ 12.
Case 2:26-cv-00990-MIS-SCY Document 10 Filed 04/21/26 Page 1 of 3

2
On January 23, 2026, Petitioner was stopped at a checkpoint on Highway 54 in New
Mexico and taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) officers.
Id. ¶ 8. The Government attempted to remove Petitioner to Mexico, but Mexico refused to accept
him, id. ¶ 14, and there are no plans to remove him to Cuba, id.; Martinez Decl. ¶ 20. Petitioner
has a pending cancellation of removal application. Pet. ¶ 11.
On April 1, 2026, Petitioner filed the instant Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus seeking
immediate release from custody under reasonable conditions of supervision, or, alternatively, a
bond hearing. Id. at 4.
II. Discussion
Habeas corpus review is available if a noncitizen is “in custody in violation of the
Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); see also Zadvydas
v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 687 (2001). Where, as here, the petitioner is subject to a final order of
removal, detention is governed by Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682, and 8 U.S.C. § 1231. The
Government is expected to secure a noncitizen’s removal within 90 days after issuing the removal
order. Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1). “[D]uring the 90-day removal
period, … [the noncitizen] must be held in custody.” Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 683 (citing 8 U.S.C.
§ 1231(a)(2)). After that, the Government may continue detaining the noncitizen only for as long
as is “reasonably necessary” to secure their removal. Id. at 683, 689; see 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6).
The Supreme Court determined that a six-month detention period is presumptively reasonable.
Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. “After this 6–month period, once the [petitioner] provides good reason
to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future,
the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing.” Id.
Case 2:26-cv-00990-MIS-SCY Document 10 Filed 04/21/26 Page 2 of 3

3
Here, a final order of removal was issued on October 17, 2022, Pet. ¶ 12, and Petitioner
has been detained since January 23, 2026, id. ¶ 8. Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention
during the 90-day removal period, which will expire April 23, 2026. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2)(A)
(“During the removal period, the Attorney General shall detain the” noncitizen). Even when the
90-day statutory removal period expires, Petitioner’s detention is presumptively reasonable
through July 23, 2026. See Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. Therefore, Petitioner’s detention is not
unlawful and the Court cannot order his release.
Petitioner is also not entitled to a bond hearing. See Gregorio v. Warden, Case No. 2:26-
cv-00657-JLT-SKO, 2026 WL 810004, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2026) (“Petitioner is … not
entitled to a bond hearing because during the 90-day removal period set forth in § 1231(a)(1)(A),
his detention is mandatory”); Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, 594 U.S. 523, 526 (2021) (“We conclude
that § 1231, not § 1226, governs the detention of aliens subject to … orders of removal, meaning
those aliens are not entitled to a bond hearing”).
Because the Court cannot grant Petitioner relief at this time, the Court will deny the Petition
without prejudice. Petitioner may file a new habeas petition under Zadvydas if his detention
extends beyond the presumptively reasonable six-month period (i.e., after July 23, 2026) or if his
detention otherwise becomes unlawful.
III. Conclusion
Therefore, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Frank Martinez Alvarez’s Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1, is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
………………………………………….
MARGARET STRICKLAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-00990-MIS-SCY Document 10 Filed 04/21/26 Page 3 of 3