Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01563/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-01563-1/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)

---

1

3:19-cv-1563-WQH-AHG

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY ALEXANDRE,

Petitioner,

v.

PARTICK COVELLO, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No.: 3:19-cv-1563-WQH-AHG

ORDER

HAYES, Judge:

On August 19, 2020, Petitioner Anthony Alexandre, a state prisoner proceeding pro 

se, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1). 

In the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Alexandre challenged his state court conviction 

for corporal injury to a spouse or roommate in violation of § 273.5(a) of the California 

Penal Code; stalking in violation of section 646.9(a) of the California Penal Code; false 

imprisonment by violence, menace, fraud or deceit in violation of sections 236 and 237(a) 

of the California Penal Code; and attempting to dissuade a witness from reporting a crime 

in violation of section 136.1(b)(1) of the California Penal Code. 

On March 6, 2020, the Court denied Alexandre’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. 

(ECF No. 11). On March 24, 2020, Alexandre filed a Motion for Joseph Hearing pursuant 

to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c). (ECF No. 13). Alexandre, who is now in federal custody at the Otay 

Case 3:19-cv-01563-WQH-AHG Document 16 Filed 04/27/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

3:19-cv-1563-WQH-AHG

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

Mesa Detention Center, moves the Court for a “Joseph [h]earing” to determine “whether 

or not Petitioner is currently being properly held in detention . . . .” (Id. at 1). Alexandre 

contends that he is not properly detained in federal custody because his state court 

conviction “does not satisfy the criteria for deportation proceedings” under 8 U.S.C. § 

1226(c) that a non-citizen’s criminal history include a crime that “involv[es] moral 

turpitude.” (Id. at 3). 

“Section 1226(c) requires that the Attorney General detain any non-citizen who is 

inadmissible or deportable because of his criminal history upon that person’s release from 

imprisonment, pending proceedings to remove him from the United States.” Rodriguez v. 

Robbins, 804 F. 3d 1060, 1078 (9th Cir. 2015), overruled on other grounds by Jennings v. 

Rodriguez, 138 S. Ct. 830 (2018). An individual detained under § 1226(c) may request a 

“Joseph hearing” before an immigration judge to determine whether the individual is 

properly included in the category of non-citizens subject to mandatory detention based on 

the individual’s criminal history. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(h)(2)(ii); see generally, In re 

Joseph, 22 I. & N. Dec. 799 (BIA 1999).

Alexandre’s Motion for Joseph Hearing, challenging his federal detention, is 

improperly raised in this action on his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, challenging his 

state court conviction. Any challenge to Alexandre’s federal detention must be filed as a 

new petition and comply with all procedural and jurisdictional requirements of 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2241. Alexandre’s Motion for Joseph Hearing (ECF No. 13) is denied.

Dated: April 27, 2020

Case 3:19-cv-01563-WQH-AHG Document 16 Filed 04/27/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2