Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
OSMON ISAAC MARTINEZ VASQUEZ,
Petitioner,
v. No. 2:26-cv-00508-KG-GJF
TODD LYONS, et al.,
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Osmon Martinez’ Motion to Enforce,
Doc. 10, and the Government’s Response, Doc. 15. Petitioner argues that the bond hearing held
after the Court’s prior Order, Doc. 9, did not comply with the due process requirements set forth
in that Order. After reviewing the parties’ submissions and a digital audio recording (“DAR”) of
the proceeding, the Court denies the motion to enforce.1
I. Background
Petitioner is a 23-year-old Honduran citizen who entered the United States in 2019. Doc.
1 at 9. On July 14, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security arrested Petitioner at the Sierra
Blanca checkpoint. Id. He remains detained at the Otero County Processing Center in New
Mexico. Id. at 1.
Petitioner filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, Doc. 1, and the Court held that
Petitioner’s detention absent a bond hearing violated the Immigration and Nationality Act
(“INA”) and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Doc. 9 at 3. On April 1, 2026, the
1 The DAR of the Bond Hearing (April 2, 2026) is on file with the Court and lodged at
Doc. 14 (the “Audio Recording”).
Case 2:26-cv-00508-KG-GJF Document 16 Filed 05/29/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Court ordered the Government to provide a bond hearing within seven days, at which it had the
burden to justify his continued detention by clear and convincing evidence, or release him. Id.
at 4.
An Immigration Judge (“IJ”) presided over the hearing on April 2, 2026. See Doc. 10 at
5. The Government argued that Petitioner’s relief is “speculative at this point, and our databases
show that [Petitioner] has a pending criminal charge for cocaine possession.” Audio Recording
at 5:49. In addition, the Government “assert[ed] that [Petitioner] is a danger to the community
and a flight risk.” Id. at 6:17. After questioning Petitioner, the IJ denied his bond request after
finding he is “a danger to the community due to [his] drug arrest and charge.” Id. at 9:51. The IJ
also found that Petitioner’s “relief to be speculative.” Id. at 10:05. Petitioner moves to enforce
the Court’s prior order, arguing that the IJ based his decision “on a generalized Rule rather than
individualized findings.” Doc. 10 at 2.
II. Analysis
Petitioner’s bond hearing satisfied the due process requirements set forth in this Court’s
prior order. Under ordinary circumstances, “the burden” at an 8 U.S.C. § 1226 bond hearing “is
on the noncitizen” to show that detention is unwarranted. Salazar v. Dedos, 2025 WL 2676729,
at *3 (D.N.M.). In granting Petitioner’s habeas petition, however, this Court held that due
process required shifting that burden to the Government. Doc. 9 at 4. Nothing in the record
demonstrates that the IJ failed to apply the burden-shifting framework. To the contrary, the IJ
only heard argument from the Government, indicating that the Government bore the burden. See
Audio Recording at 5:49. The Government made individualized arguments in favor of
Petitioner’s continued detention. Id. This Court’s jurisdiction does not extend to reconsidering
Case 2:26-cv-00508-KG-GJF Document 16 Filed 05/29/26 Page 2 of 3

3
the IJ’s bond determination once the burden was properly shifted. A review of the bond
determination is for the Board of Immigration Appeals.
III. Conclusion
Petitioner’s Motion to Enforce this Court’s prior habeas Order, Doc. 10, is denied.
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 2:26-cv-00508-KG-GJF Document 16 Filed 05/29/26 Page 3 of 3