Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Magdalena B. Metelska, METELSKA LAW, P.L.L.C., Post Office Box 156,
Hopkins, MN 55343, for Petitioner.

Carl Berry and David W. Fuller, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, 300
South Fourth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55415, for Federal
Respondents.

NELSON E.T.N.,

Petitioner,

v.

DAVID J. VENTURELLA, in his official
capacity as Acting Director, U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;

DAVID EASTERWOOD, in his official
capacity as the St. Paul Field Office
Director for U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement;

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, in his official
capacity as Secretary of the United States
Department of Homeland Security;

TODD BLANCHE, in his official capacity as
Attorney General of the United States;

KANDIYOHI JAIL ADMINISTRATOR, in their
official capacity,

Respondents.

Civil No. 26-3541 (JRT/DLM)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GRANTING IN PART PETITION FOR WRIT
OF HABEAS CORPUS

CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 1 of 6

-2-
Petitioner Nelson E.T.N. is a citizen of Ecuador who is currently in Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) custody in Minnesota. On August 6, 2026, Petitioner filed
a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus alleging that his arrest and continued detention
violate the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706) and the Fifth Amendment of the
United States Constitution. On August 12, 2026, the Court ordered Respondents to
provide the Court with more information by August 13, 2026. Respondents timely
responded, and Petitioner also filed a motion for leave to respond and a proposed
response.
Because the Court concludes that Petitioner Nelson E.T.N.’s arrest was unlawful,
the Court will grant in part his petition for writ of habeas corpus and order that he be
released from custody.
1

BACKGROUND
I. FACTS
Petitioner is a citizen of Ecuador. (Pet. for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Pet.”) ¶ 39,
Aug. 6, 2026, Docket No. 1.) He has resided in the United States since approximately
November 2022 and has a pending asylum application. (Id. ¶¶ 1, 40.)
On November 24, 2022, Customs and Border Patrol encountered Petitioner after
he attempted to enter the United States. (Decl. of William J. Robinson (“Robinson Decl.”)

1
Because the Court concludes that Nelson E.T.N.’s arrest was unlawful and he is entitled
to release on that ground, it will not address the other grounds on which Petitioner requested
relief.
CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 2 of 6

-3-
¶ 5, Aug. 9, 2026, Docket No. 6.) On November 26, 2022, Petitioner was released on
humanitarian parole with an expiration date of January 26, 2023. (Id. ¶ 6.) Petitioner
applied for asylum on or about November 26, 2023. (Pet. ¶ 41.)
On August 4, 2026, Petitioner went to Fort Snelling for what he believed was a
scheduled check-in. (Id. ¶ 45.) Petitioner’s appointment was, in fact, scheduled for
August 5, 2026. (Decl. of Ercilia Susana Changoluisa Guamani (“Guamani Decl.”) ¶ 4–5,
Ex. E, Aug. 10, 2026, Docket No. 7-3.)
When Petitioner arrived at Fort Snelling on August 4, 2026, he was taken into
custody. (Pet. ¶ 45; see also Robinson Decl. ¶¶ 10–11.) Respondents attest that
Petitioner was taken into custody pursuant to a “previously issued [Notice to Appear] and
I-200” (id.); however, both the Notice to Appear (NTA) and I-200 are also dated August 4,
2026 (id. ¶¶ 8-9 & Exs. B, C). Respondents also initially declared that “Petitioner was
scheduled for a check-in appointment with ICE/ERO on August 4, 2026” (id. ¶ 7) even
though Petitioner’s appointment was not scheduled until the following day. (Guamani
Decl., Ex. E; see also Resp. to Order at 1, Aug. 13, 2026, Docket No. 10.)
II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On August 6, 2026, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,
contending that his arrest and detention are unlawful under the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706) and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. (Pet.
¶¶ 51–61.) The Court directed Respondents to file a reasoned memorandum responding
to Petitioner’s claims. (Order, Aug. 7, 2026, Docket No. 4.) Federal Respondents timely
CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 3 of 6

-4-
filed a response, and Petitioner replied. (Response, Aug. 9, 2026, Docket No. 5; Reply,
Aug. 10, 2026, Docket No. 7.)
Because Petitioner presented evidence in his reply that his appointment was not
scheduled until the day after he was taken into custody August 5, 2026 (Guamani Decl.,
Ex. E), the Court ordered Respondents “to provide further information on the timing of
the issuance of both the NTA and the I-200 as well as the time at which Petitioner was
detained.” (Order (“August 12 Order”), Aug. 12, 2026, Docket No. 9.)
On August 13, 2026, Respondents submitted a response but did not provide any
additional declaratory evidence. (See generally Resp. to Order.) Petitioner also filed a
motion for leave to respond and a proposed response. (Docket No. 11.) The Court will
grant that motion and has considered the Petitioner’s proposed response.
DISCUSSION
In its August 12 Order, the Court indicated that it was unable to conclude on the
facts before it that Petitioner’s arrest was premised on a valid I-200 administrative
warrant. Although given the opportunity to provide additional evidence, Respondents
have not. Because no persuasive evidence has been submitted to the Court that the
sequencing of the issuance of the Notice to Appear, Form I-200, Warrant of Arrest, and
arrest were appropriate and confirmed with ICE’s regulations, the Court concludes that
Petitioner’s detention is unlawful.
CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 4 of 6

-5-
When ICE fails to comply with federal immigration law when arresting and
detaining Petitioner, release is the proper remedy. See, e.g., Ahmed M. v. Bondi, Civ. No.
25-4711, 2026 WL 25627, at *3 (D. Minn. Jan. 5, 2026); Lauro M. v. Bondi, Civ. No. 26-134,
2026 WL 115022, at *3 (D. Minn. Jan. 15, 2026); cf. Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 693
(2008) (“Habeas is at its core a remedy for unlawful executive detention . . . . The typical
remedy for such detention is, of course, release.”). The Court will, therefore, order
Petitioner’s immediate release.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that
1. Petitioner Nelson E.T.N.’s Motion for Leave to Respond to Respondents’ Response
to Order (Docket No. [11]) is GRANTED.
2. Petitioner Nelson E.T.N.’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Docket No. [1]) is
GRANTED IN PART as follows:
a. Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner from custody as soon as practicable,
and no later than 24 hours from the filing of this Order.
b. Respondents must release Petitioner with all personal effects, such as
driver’s licenses, passports, or immigration documents, and without any
new conditions. Respondents must also coordinate with Petitioner’s
counsel to ensure safe release.
CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 5 of 6

-6-
c. The parties shall provide the Court with a status update concerning the
status of Petitioner's release by no later than 5:00 p.m. on August 17, 2026.
Further, the parties shall advise the Court whether any additional
proceedings in this matter are required and submit any proposals for the
scope of further litigation.

DATED: August 14, 2026
at Minneapolis, Minnesota. JOHN R. TUNHEIM
5:15 p.m. United States District Judge
CASE 0:26-cv-03541-JRT-DLM Doc. 12 Filed 08/14/26 Page 6 of 6