Evgenii Ivanov v. Christopher Larose, et al.
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- other — 5.) The Court issues 2 || the following writ: 3 The Court ORDERS Respondents to immediately r
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
Petitioner Evgenii Ivanov filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, alleging he had been detained beyond the presumptively reasonable period established in Zadvydas v. Davis. The Court granted the petition and ordered the immediate release of the Petitioner from custody subject to standard conditions of supervision.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition. (ECF No. 5.)” | agree with court The decision follows from the law and the record recited in the order. The Petitioner alleged detention beyond the presumptively reasonable period under Zadvydas v. Davis. The Government conceded it could not establish a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future and did not oppose release. Under Zadvydas, when the government cannot show a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, continued detention is not authorized, and release on conditions is the appropriate remedy. |
Ordering immediate release from custody subject to supervision“The Court ORDERS Respondents to immediately release Evgeni Ivanov (A# 215-818-445) from custody subject to supervision under the standard conditions authorized by 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(3).” | agree with court The order correctly applies the statutory framework for release. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(3) authorizes the release of an alien on conditions, including supervision, when detention is no longer required or authorized. Given the Government's concession and the Zadvydas standard, this is the correct procedural outcome. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound and relies on the correct legal standard (Zadvydas). It accurately reflects the Government's concession that it cannot establish a significant likelihood of removal, which triggers the requirement for release. The order is concise but sufficient for a case resolved on the Government's non-opposition and concession of the key factual/legal element.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 EVGENII IVANOV, Case No. 26-cv-04814-BAS-JAC 14 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING AMENDED 15 v. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 5) 16 CHRISTOPHER LAROSE, et al., 17 Respondents. 18 19 20 Petitioner Evgenii Ivanov filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 21 under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 5.) Petitioner alleges that he is subject to a final order 22 of removal; he has been in custody for longer than the presumptively reasonable period 23 under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001); and there is no significant likelihood of 24 removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. (Id.) 25 In its Response to the Petition, the Government states it “is unable to ascertain 26 sufficient facts at this time to establish that there is a significant likelihood of removal in 27 the reasonably foreseeable future.” (ECF No. 7.) Therefore, the Government does not 28 oppose Petitioner being “released from custody subject to conditions of supervision.” (Id.) 1 || Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition. (ECF No. 5.) The Court issues 2 || the following writ: 3 The Court ORDERS Respondents to immediately release Evgeni Ivanov 4 (A# 215-818-445) from custody subject to supervision under the standard conditions authorized by 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(3). 5 6 The Clerk of Court shall close the case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 || DATED: September 8, 2026 yatta Bahar 10 Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge United States District Court 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28