Jerry Osazee Osaretin v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- other — § 1225(b)(2); and 1 (2) Respondents are ORDERED to File a Notice of Compliance within five days 2 of providing Petitione
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- James E. Simmons (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a habeas petition by an immigration detainee who was found in a separate case to be subject to detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). The court granted the petition in part, ordering a bond hearing within ten days and a notice of compliance, while holding the remaining claims in abeyance.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus granted in part“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART the petition as follows:” | agree with court The court relied on the final judgment in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, which established that the petitioner is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), an immigration judge must set bond or order release if the alien is not a danger to the community or a flight risk. By ordering a bond hearing, the court is enforcing the statutory requirement for a bond determination for those detained under § 1226(a). The decision follows from the cited authority and the statutory framework. |
Order for bond determination hearing within ten days“The Court ORDERS Respondents to provide Petitioner with a bond determination hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within ten days of this Order.” | agree with court This is a procedural order to effectuate the statutory right to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). The ten-day timeframe is a reasonable administrative deadline for the government to comply with a court order in a habeas context. |
Prohibition on denying bond based on 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)“At the hearing, Respondents may not deny Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2);” | agree with court The court is clarifying the legal basis for detention. Since the petitioner is detained under § 1226(a) (post-removal order or similar), the government cannot use the different statutory provision for pre-removal detention (§ 1225(b)(2)) to deny bond. This ensures the correct statutory standard is applied. |
Order to file Notice of Compliance“Respondents are ORDERED to File a Notice of Compliance within five days of providing Petitioner with a bond redetermination hearing, including apprising the Court of the results of the hearing.” | agree with court This is a standard procedural mechanism to ensure the court can monitor compliance with its order. It is a reasonable exercise of the court's supervisory authority. |
Remaining claims held in abeyance“Pending the status report, the Court will hold in abeyance the merits of the remainder of the relief Petitioner requests in his petition.” | agree with court The court is deferring ruling on other aspects of the petition until it sees the outcome of the bond hearing. This is a common and prudent judicial practice to avoid unnecessary rulings if the primary relief (bond) is granted. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound and logically consistent. It correctly identifies the applicable statute (8 U.S.C. § 1226(a)) based on a prior final judgment and orders the necessary bond hearing. It also correctly prevents the government from using an inapplicable statute (8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)) to deny bond. The decision to hold other claims in abeyance is prudent. There are no apparent gaps or errors in the reasoning provided.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JERRY OSAZEE OSARETIN, Case No.: 25-cv-3612-JES-MSB 12 Petitioner, ORDER FOR BOND HEARING 13 v. 14 WARDEN, OTAY MESA DETENTION CENTER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 18 Before the Court is Petitioner Jerry Osazee Osaretin’s (“Petitioner”) Petition for Writ 19 of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1. Pursuant to the Court’s OSC 20 order, Respondents filed a response. ECF No. 6. In the response, Respondents 21 acknowledged that Petitioner must be considered detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), 22 pursuant to the final judgment entered in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-CV- 23 01873-SSS-BFM, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, 2025 WL 3289861 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2025). 24 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART the petition as follows: 25 (1) The Court ORDERS Respondents to provide Petitioner with a bond 26 determination hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within ten days of this Order. 27 At the hearing, Respondents may not deny Petitioner bond on the basis that 28 he is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2); and 1 (2) Respondents are ORDERED to File a Notice of Compliance within five days 2 of providing Petitioner with a bond redetermination hearing, including 3 apprising the Court of the results of the hearing. 4 || Pending the status report, the Court will hold in abeyance the merits of the remainder of 5 || the relief Petitioner requests in his petition. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 || Dated: December 24, 2025 . Sn Sin, 9 Honorable James E. Sunmons Jr. 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28