Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Danny Duran Martinez, a Cuban citizen, entered the United States without inspection in September 2022 and was taken into immigration custody in October 2025. An immigration judge ordered him removed to Ecuador on May 4, 2026.
Martinez did not appeal, so the removal order became administratively final on June 3, 2026. He petitioned for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, arguing that his prolonged detention violated due process. The respondents moved for summary judgment, contending that he had not shown unconstitutional detention under Zadvydas.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that Martinez’s detention did not violate due process because he had been detained under a final removal order for only about three months. That period was shorter than the six-month period considered presumptively reasonable under Zadvydas.
The court therefore dismissed the habeas petition without prejudice as premature. It stated that Martinez could refile if he remained detained after six months, exhausted available administrative remedies, and showed that he had cooperated with ICE’s efforts to obtain travel documents for his removal.
Key Takeaways
- Post-removal-order detention lasting less than six months was insufficient to state an actionable due-process claim under Zadvydas.
- The dismissal was without prejudice, leaving Martinez free to bring a later challenge if his detention continues and the stated conditions are met.
- A future petition must address administrative exhaustion and Martinez’s cooperation with efforts to secure removal documents.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that a habeas challenge to post-removal-order detention ordinarily is premature before the six-month presumptively reasonable period expires. Continued custody beyond that point does not automatically require release, but it may permit a renewed challenge supported by the detainee’s circumstances and cooperation with removal efforts.