Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03121/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03121-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KATALIN HORVATH,

Petitioner,

v.

IMMIGRATION CUSTOMS

ENFORCEMENT, etc.; et al.,

Respondents. /

No. C 09-3121 MHP (pr)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Katalin Horvath has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241

which is now before the court for initial review. Horvath alleges that she is in the Contra

Costa County Jail serving a jail sentence on a state criminal conviction. She also alleges that

the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("BICE") has issued a hold against her

for her removal from the United States. 

Horvath's petition claims no violation of her rights under the Constitution, laws or

treaties of the United States. Rather, she asks that the court order BICE to lift the hold it has

placed on her for 24 hours so she can organize her life in preparation for her departure from

the United States. It is a stretch to characterize this request as a claim for habeas relief, but

the court will liberally construe it to be a claim that BICE is wrongfully refusing to lift its

hold.

Case 3:09-cv-03121-MHP Document 7 Filed 04/05/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The petition has an incurable flaw: Horvath cannot meet the custody requirement. 

Federal jurisdiction over a petition for a writ of habeas corpus exists only for petitions filed

by persons "in custody" at the time the petition is filed. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c); Carafas v.

LaVallee, 391 U.S. 234, 238 (1968). “‘[T]he bare detainer letter alone does not sufficiently

place an alien in INS custody to make habeas corpus available.’” Campos v. INS, 62 F.3d

311, 314 (9th Cir. 1995) (quoting Garcia v. Taylor, 40 F.3d 299, 303 (9th Cir. 1994)). The

petitioner has to be in custody for the action she seeks to challenge in her habeas petition. 

Horvath is currently a California prisoner serving a sentence on a state court conviction and

not considered to be in custody as a result of the BICE detainer filed against her. Yet BICE,

rather than the sheriff in charge of the jail, is responsible for the allegedly wrongful refusal to

lift the hold and that creates the predicament Horvath faces. Because she is not in BICE's

custody, her petition challenging BICE's action or inaction is dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. 

The in forma pauperis application is GRANTED. (Docket # 3, # 4.)

The clerk shall close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 2, 2010 

Marilyn Hall Patel

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-03121-MHP Document 7 Filed 04/05/10 Page 2 of 2