gno.law

District Court, S.D. California · 3:26-cv-01324 · 2026-03-04 · Unknown

Wiskencia Desulma v. Director, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.

Proceeding
original
Outcome
other — 3 |}2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are 4 || vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or pate
Area
civil
Panel
Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T20:38Z · confidence high

Petitioner Wiskencia Desulma, a self-represented individual detained by ICE, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court granted the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered the Government to file a response to the petition by March 12, 2026.

What the court decidedThe model
Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis granted
“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis.”
agree with court
The order states the petitioner attests to having no means to pay the $5.00 filing fee. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a court must grant IFP status if the applicant demonstrates inability to pay. The recited facts support the grant.
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus not dismissed; Government ordered to respond
“Therefore, the Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition.”
agree with court
The court applied the standard for summary dismissal of habeas petitions, finding the allegations were not vague, conclusory, or frivolous. This is the correct procedural step for a § 2241 petition that survives initial screening.

The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies the standard for summary dismissal of habeas petitions and grants IFP status based on the petitioner's attestation. It properly directs the government to respond and specifically addresses the relevance of a related class action.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WISKENCIA DESULMA, Case No. 26-cv-01324-BAS-JLB 12 Petitioner, ORDER: 13 v. (1) GRANTING MOTION FOR 14 DIRECTOR, OTAY MESA LEAVE TO PROCEED IN DETENTION CENTER, et al., 15 FORMA PAUPERIS (ECF Respondents. No. 2); AND 16 17 (2) REQUIRING THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND 18 TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF 19 HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 1)

20 21 Petitioner Wiskencia Desulma filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant 22 to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner is self-represented. She claims she is being 23 unlawfully detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a bond 24 determination. (See id.) 25 Petitioner has also filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis attesting Petitioner 26 has no means to pay the $5.00 filing fee. (ECF No. 2.) Accordingly, the Court GRANTS 27 Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall file the Petition for 28 a Writ of Habeas Corpus without prepayment of the filing fee. I Further, having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal is 2 unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 3 |}2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are 4 || vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the 5 ||Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition. Accordingly, the Court 6 || ORDERS as follows: 7 l. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than March 12, 8 2026. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the Petition and must 9 ||}include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. 10 || The Government must also address whether Petitioner is a member of the class certified in 11 || Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3678485 (C.D. 12 Dec. 18, 2025). 13 2. No reply by Petitioner is necessary unless requested by the Court. 14 3. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s 15 || Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 || DATED: March 4, 2026 (yatta Baha □□ 19 Hd¢n. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 4 United States District Court 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ~_9_