Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02264/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02264-0/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

Oscar Larin Delgado, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Katrina Kane, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-2264-PHX-ROS

ORDER

Petitioner Oscar Larin Delgado filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, arguing

that his detention for two years and six months while his removal proceedings have been

pending is unlawful. (Doc. 1). This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Glenda E.

Edmonds, who issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court

grant the Petition and order Respondent to provide a hearing to Petitioner within 60 days

before an Immigration Judge with the power to grant him bail unless Respondent establishes

that he is a flight risk or will be a danger to the community. (Doc. 8). Respondent filed

Objections to the R&R. (Doc. 15). For the reasons stated herein, the Court will adopt the

Magistrate Judge’s R&R.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Because objections

were made, the Court reviews the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo.

Case 2:07-cv-02264-ROS Document 16 Filed 07/03/08 Page 1 of 3
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 -

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)

(en banc). 

DISCUSSION

Relying primarily upon Tijani v. Willis, 430 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir. 2005), the Magistrate

Judge found that Petitioner’s detention for two years and six months and counting under 8

U.S.C. § 1226(c) not authorized by law. In Tijani, the alien was “deprived of his liberty by

the government for a period of over two years and eight months.” Id. at 1242. To avoid the

question whether such a lengthy detention was constitutional, the Ninth Circuit interpreted

Section 1226(c) as requiring expeditious removal. Id. Because the court determined that

nearly three years was not expeditious, it remanded the case to the district court to grant the

habeas petition unless the government provided the alien a bail hearing before an

Immigration Judge. Id. The period of time at issue here is almost exactly the same length

as in Tijani, and thus clearly not expeditious. Therefore, the Court agrees with the Magistrate

Judge that Petitioner’s continued detention is not authorized by law. See Castro v. Crawford,

CV 06-1522, 2007 WL 2973494 (D. Ariz. Oct. 9, 2007) (Silver, J.) (holding that alien’s

detention for two years and seven months was not authorized by law under Tijani); Singh v.

Crawford, No. CV 06-2194, 2007 WL 2237637 (D. Ariz. Aug. 3, 2007) (Murguia, J.) (same

for nine months); Ali v. Crawford, No. CV 06-1149, 2007 WL 1670165 (D. Ariz. June 8,

2007) (same for four years) (Crawford, J.). But see Arnold v. Crawford, —F. Supp. 2d —,

2008 WL 211 5842 (D. Ariz. May 20, 2008) (Teilborg, J.). 

Having reviewed the record de novo, including the Objections filed by Respondent,

the Court will adopt the Magistrate Judge’s R&R and incorporates the same as part of this

Order.

Accordingly,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 8) is

ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) is GRANTED.

Case 2:07-cv-02264-ROS Document 16 Filed 07/03/08 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall either release Petitioner from

custody under an order of supervision, or provide a hearing to Petitioner, within 60 days of

the filing of this Order, before an Immigration Judge with the power to grant him bail unless

Respondent establishes that he is a flight risk or will be a danger to the community. 

DATED this 3rd day of July, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-02264-ROS Document 16 Filed 07/03/08 Page 3 of 3