Terminated
Case Information
Filed: November 10, 2025
Assigned to:
Richard Gaylore Stearns
Referred to:
—
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause:
28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Terminated: December 10, 2025
Last Activity:
December 10, 2025
Parties:
View All Parties →
Docket Entries
#1
Nov 13, 2025
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241
Main Document:
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241
Nov 13, 2025
Notice of Case Assignment
Nov 13, 2025
Copy Mailed
#5
Nov 20, 2025
Notice of Appearance
Main Document:
Notice of Appearance
#6
Nov 21, 2025
Response - not related to a motion
Main Document:
Response - not related to a motion
#7
Nov 21, 2025
Declaration
Main Document:
Declaration
#8
Nov 24, 2025
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re 6 Response. Petitioner may file a reply by December 3, 2025.(RGS, law3) (Entered: 11/24/2025)
#9
Nov 24, 2025
ELECTRONIC NOTICE Setting Hearing on Motion: Motion Hearing (on Petition Dkt #1, and Govt Response Dkt #6 and #7, and expected Reply (due December 3, 2025)) set for 12/9/2025 02:00 AM in Courtroom 21 (In person only) before Judge Richard G. Stearns. (TRM) (Entered: 11/24/2025)
Nov 24, 2025
Order
Nov 24, 2025
Notice Setting or Resetting Hearing on Motion
#10
Dec 03, 2025
Extension of Time
Main Document:
Extension of Time
#11
Dec 04, 2025
Response - not related to a motion
Main Document:
Response - not related to a motion
#12
Dec 04, 2025
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered granting 10 Motion for Extension of Time because of an inability to utilize CM/ECF. (MZ) (Entered: 12/04/2025)
Dec 04, 2025
Order on Motion for Extension of Time
#13
Dec 08, 2025
Notice of Appearance
Main Document:
Notice of Appearance
#14
Dec 09, 2025
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. After a hearing, the court will deny petitioner Jeremy Garcia Vasquez's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner concedes that he fits within the detention provisions of the Laken Riley Act, 8 U.S.C. s. 1226(c)(1)(E). He maintains, however, that the application of the Act in his case based on his arrest for a "petty" offense (shoplifting) constitutes a violation of due process. The court disagrees and declines to follow the reasoning of the district court in Doe v. Muniz, 2025 WL 2576819 (D. Mass. Sept. 5, 2025), regarding the constitutionality of the Act. While the court can conceive of a case in which indefinite mandatory detention under the Act might ripen into violation of petitioner's due process rights, that is not this case (petitioner has been in custody at this point for roughly two months). The petitioner's constitutional objection to the denial of the writ is noted and preserved.(RGS, law3) (Entered: 12/09/2025)
#16
Dec 09, 2025
Electronic Clerk's Notes for proceedings held before Judge Richard G. Stearns: Motion Hearing held re Petition Dkt #1, and Govt Response Dkt #6 and #7, and Reply. Court hears argument from the parties. (Court Reporter: Jennifer Vaillancourt at jenn.m.vaillancourt@gmail.com.)(Attorneys present: Vazquez, O'Connor) (TRM) (Entered: 12/10/2025)
Dec 09, 2025
Order
#15
Dec 10, 2025
Judge Richard G. Stearns: ORDER entered. ORDER DISMISSING CASE. (JAM) (Entered: 12/10/2025)
Main Document:
Order Dismissing Case
Dec 10, 2025
Motion Hearing
Parties
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Attorney
Attorney
Attorney
Attorney
Firm