Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02949/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-02949-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

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

- 1 -

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEJANDRO RODRIGUEZ-PRECIADO,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 11-CV-2949-LAB

ORDER DENYING 28 U.S.C. 

vs. § 2255 HABEAS MOTION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

Alejandro Rodriguez-Preciado is currently serving a 135-month sentence for the

importation of cocaine and methamphetamine. Now before the Court is his habeas petition

brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, through which he seeks a sentence reduction. He

seeks the reduction on the ground that, due to his alien status, he is ineligible for a one-year

sentence reduction through a drug program, or early release into a halfway house. He

argues that deprivation of these benefits or privileges due to his alien status violates his Fifth

and Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection. This is a familiar

claim that aliens make in federal habeas petitions, using what appears to be a viral form

pleading, and the Court has consistently rejected it.

To state an equal protection claim, a plaintiff must allege he was treated differently

from other similarly situated persons, see City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S.

432, 439 (1985), and deportable aliens are not "similarly situated" to United States citizens.

It is not an equal protection violation to allow United States citizen-inmates, who must reCase 3:11-cv-02949-LAB Document 2 Filed 01/13/12 Page 1 of 2
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 -

enter domestic society, to participate in rehabilitative or other programs while denying that

privilege to deportable inmates. See, e.g., Santos v. United States, 940 F.Supp. 275, 281

(D. Hawaii 1996) (one's status as deportable alien, which may result in ineligibility for less

restrictive terms of confinement, cannot justify downward departure; plaintiff failed to state

an equal protection claim "because deportable aliens are not 'similarly situated' to United

States citizens"). The Supreme Court "has firmly and repeatedly endorsed the proposition

that Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens."

Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510, 521-22 (2003).

This Court has previously rejected the claim that an alien’s ineligibility for various

prisoner programs or benefits violates that person’s rights. See Rendon-Inzunza v. United

States, 2010 WL 3076271 (S.D. Cal. 2010); Lizarraga-Lopez v. United States, 89 F.Supp.2d

1166 (S.D. Cal. 2000). Those holdings stand. The purpose of halfway houses is to

facilitate the reintegration of prisoners into the community, but prisoners in RodriguezPreciado’s position are released first to the Attorney General and then to a foreign

community. Moreover, halfway houses are still custodial institutions wherein prisoners serve

out their full sentences, and from which deportable aliens would be a unique flight risk.

No due process or equal protection issue arises merely because a defendant's alien

status excludes him from certain programs available to citizens, within the prison system or

without. Accordingly, Rodriguez-Preciado’s argument that the Court should consider his

request for an additional downward departure on that basis is rejected. His habeas petition

is accordingly DENIED. The Court also DENIES him a certificate of appealability. See 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 12, 2012

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-02949-LAB Document 2 Filed 01/13/12 Page 2 of 2