Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00711/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00711-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Stanley Edner, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Philip Crawford, Director ICE Field

Office,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 06-0711-PHX-MHM (BPV)

ORDER

Petitioner has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241

alleging that immigration officials were holding him in detention pending his removal to The

Bahamas, but that his removal could not be effected. Petitioner sought his immediate release

from custody on the grounds that his indefinite detention with no prospect that his removal

would be effected in the reasonably foreseeable future was not authorized by law. The matter

was referred to Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco who has issued a Report and

Recommendation that recommends dismissing Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

as moot (Dkt. #15). Petitioner has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation.

The district court must review the Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendations

de novo if objection is made but not otherwise. United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114,

1121 (9th Cir. 2003)(en banc). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)("[a] judge of the court shall

Case 2:06-cv-00711-MHM Document 17 Filed 12/27/06 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 -

make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings

or recommendations to which objection is made"). 

The Magistrate Judge has recommended that the Petition should be denied as moot

because Petitioner was released on March 29, 2006 under an Order of Supervision. On

September 19, 2006, the Court gave Petitioner until October 20, 2006 to show good cause

why this case should not be dismissed as moot. Petitioner did not respond.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED adopting the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt.

# 15) in its entirety as the Order of the Court; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied

and dismissed with prejudice. 

 DATED this 20th day of December, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00711-MHM Document 17 Filed 12/27/06 Page 2 of 2