Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Erkan Associates x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee | Massachusetts
Order
Judge Brian E. Murphy: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. On February 6, 2026, the Court ordered Respondents to “determine whether Petitioner is a member of the class certified in Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, No. 25-CV-12664-PBS (D. Mass.), and, if so, [to] notify the Court no later than 3:00 p.m. on Monday, February 9, 2026.” Dkt. 7 at 1. On February 10, 2026, Respondents answered the Petition, taking the “position... that Petitioner is not a member of the class certified in [Guerrero Orellana],” but that “the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently addressed by this Court in Martinez v. Hyde, 792 F. Supp. 3d 211 (D. Mass. 2025), and Romero v. Hyde, 795 F. Supp. 3d 271 (D. Mass. 2025).” This response is confusing because Guerrero Orellana, Martinez, and Romero all concerned the same legal issue and all reached the same conclusion: that 8 U.S.C. s. 1225(b)(2)(A) is inapplicable to noncitizens initially “apprehended while residing in the United States.” See Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, 802 F. Supp. 3d 297, 308-09 (D. Mass. 2025) (citing Martinez, 792 F. Supp. 3d at 214); see also Romero v. Hyde, 795 F. Supp. 3d 271, 272-73 (D. Mass. 2025) (“[T]he interpretation being advanced by the Government, which would require the mandatory detention of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of individuals currently residing within the United States, is contrary to the plain text of the statute and the overall statutory scheme.”). Notwithstanding, there does not appear to be any obvious need to resolve the confusion because the result is the same whether pursuant to the judgment in Guerrero Orellana or under the logic of Martinez and Romero. Accordingly, this Petition is GRANTED in part. The Court ORDERS that Petitioner receive a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. s. 1226 to consider the merits of his release. Any request for fees should be filed within the deadlines set by the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. s. 2412. (MBM)
Judgment
Judge Brian E. Murphy: ORDER entered. FINAL JUDGMENT...In accordance with this Court’s Order (ECF #12) issued on February 12, 2026, granting in part the Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus, it is hereby ORDERED: Judgment for the Petitioner against the Respondents. (MBM)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.