Fonseca Pichs v. Noem et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case No. 26-cv-00814-CYC
JOSE ALEJANDRO FONSECA PICHS,
Petitioner,
v.
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in her official
capacity;
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General of the United States, in her official capacity,
TODD M. LYONS, Acting Director of Immigration and Custom Enforcement, in his official
capacity;
JUAN BALTAZAR, Warden of the Denver Contract ICE Detention Center, in his official
capacity; and
ROBERT GAUDIAN, Field Office Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, in his official capacity;
Respondents.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
Cyrus Y. Chung, United States Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner Jose Alejandro Fonseca Pichs, a detainee at the Denver Contract Detention
Facility, an immigration detention facility in Aurora, Colorado, petitions for a writ of habeas
corpus, contending that the respondents, who control that facility, are improperly subjecting
him to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). ECF No. 1 (the “Petition”). Instead,
he says, 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) governs his detention vel non. Because this is a fundamentally
legal debate, there is no need for a hearing on the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243. For the
reasons that follow, the Court grants the Petition.
BACKGROUND
This case is one of numerous cases in this District and across the country seeking
Case No. 1:26-cv-00814-CYC Document 12 filed 03/13/26 USDC Colorado pg 1
of 4

2
habeas relief for immigrants detained within the United States under a new interpretation of 8
U.S.C. §§ 1225, 1226. E.g., Hernandez-Redondo v. Bondi, No. 25-cv-03993-PAB, 2026 WL
290989 (D. Colo. Feb. 4, 2026); Jimenez Facio v. Baltazar, No. 25-cv-03592-CYC, 2025
WL 3559128 (D. Colo. Dec. 12, 2025); Garcia Cortes v. Noem, No. 25-cv-02677-CNS, 2025
WL 2652880 (D. Colo. Sept. 16, 2025); Batz Barreno v. Baltasar, No. 25-cv-03017-GPG-
TPO, 2025 WL 3190936 (D. Colo. Nov. 14, 2025); Loa Caballero v. Baltazar, No. 25-cv-
03120-NYW, 2025 WL 2977650 (D. Colo. Oct. 22, 2025). The petitioner seeks release or, in
the alternative, a bond hearing, and legal fees and costs. ECF No. 1 at 11.
The petitioner, a citizen of Cuba, has lived in the United States since October 7, 2021. Id.
¶¶ 16, 23. He was detained by United States Border Patrol that same day and released with an
Order of Release on Recognizance on October 11, 2021. Id. ¶ 23. Four years later, on November
14, 2025, the petitioner encountered Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) officers in a
traffic stop designed to target vehicles belonging to undocumented persons. Id. The petitioner
argues that he is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 and the respondents do not
offer any evidence of a criminal history that requires mandatory detention. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(c). Instead, they maintain that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b). ECF No. 10.
ANALYSIS
A district court may grant a writ of habeas corpus to any person who demonstrates he is
“in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws . . . of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
This includes “[c]hallenges to immigration detention.” Soberanes v. Comfort, 388 F.3d 1305,
1310 (10th Cir. 2004). The individual in custody bears the burden of proving that their detention
is unlawful. Walker v. Johnston, 312 U.S. 275, 286 (1941).
Case No. 1:26-cv-00814-CYC Document 12 filed 03/13/26 USDC Colorado pg 2
of 4

3
To meet that burden, the petitioner argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) applies to him, “that
aliens detained under § 1226(a) receive bond hearings at the outset of detention,” Jennings v.
Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 306 (2018) (citing 8 C.F.R. §§ 236.1(d)(1), 1236.1(d)(1)); see 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a) (providing for discretionary detention); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1003.19 (providing
framework for requesting a bond determination), and that his continued detention premised on 8
U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) violates his due process rights and the Immigration and Nationality Act.
ECF No. 1 at 12–16. The Court has previously resolved this legal question in favor of a similarly
situated petitioner. Jimenez Facio, 2025 WL 3559128, at *1–4. The respondents recognize this,
but “respectfully disagree with that ruling.” ECF No. 10 at 1. The Court remains firmly
convinced that it and the other judges in the District who have addressed this issue have correctly
decided those cases and incorporates its analysis from Jimenez Facio. 2025 WL 3559128, at *1–
4. To the extent the respondents contend that the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in Buenrostro-
Mendez v. Bondi, 166 F.4th 494, 502–08 (5th Cir. 2026), makes a difference, see ECF No. 9 at 2,
Judge Sweeney’s thorough rebuttal of that divided decision provides a solid foundation to
maintain the consensus that exists in this District. See Singh v. Baltazar, --- F. Supp. 3d ----,
2026 WL 352870, at *3–6 (D. Colo. Feb. 9, 2026). Accordingly, the Court finds that the
petitioner is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226, and his continued detention without a bond
hearing is therefore a violation of due process.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that the Petition, ECF No. 1, is
GRANTED.
It is further ORDERED that
Case No. 1:26-cv-00814-CYC Document 12 filed 03/13/26 USDC Colorado pg 3
of 4

4
(1) the respondents shall provide the petitioner with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a) within seven days of this Order;
(2) the respondents are ENJOINED from denying bond to the petitioner on the basis that
he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A); and
(3) the respondents shall file a status report within five days of the petitioner’s bond
hearing, stating whether he has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was
denied, the reasons for that denial.
Entered and dated this 13th day of March, 2026, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
Cyrus Y. Chung
United States Magistrate Judge
Case No. 1:26-cv-00814-CYC Document 12 filed 03/13/26 USDC Colorado pg 4
of 4