District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-12158

#1

May 12, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11739754 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Wilkin R Lara. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet [unsigned by counsel], # 2 Category Form, # 3 Affidavit)(Medrano Santana, Oriosto) Modified on 5/13/2026: to add note of missing signature (EZG). (Entered: 05/12/2026)

#2

May 13, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal. (LBO) (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#3

May 13, 2026

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (EZG) (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#4

May 13, 2026

Civil Cover Sheet [signed by counsel] by Wilkin Radhame Lara. (Medrano Santana, Oriosto) Modified on 5/13/2026: to clean up docket (EZG). (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#5

May 13, 2026

Service Order-2241 Petition

May 13, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#6

May 27, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#7

May 27, 2026

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#8

Jun 12, 2026

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), filed by Wilkin Radhame Lara. Having reviewed the petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the "Petition") filed by Petitioner Wilkin Radhame Lara ("Petitioner"), D. 1, as well as the associated declaration, D. 1-3, and the government's response, D. 7, the Court ALLOWS the Petition to the following extent. Factual Background. Petitioner is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic. D. 1-3 at 1. He entered the United States without inspection on or around November 2020 and has been living in Lawrence, Massachusetts. Id.; D. 7-1 at 1. Petitioner was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") on or around April 9, 2026 and remains in detention at Plymouth County Correctional Facility. D. 1 at 1; D. 7 at 2; D. 7-2 at 1. Petitioner alleges that his detention is not authorized under 8 U.S.C. § 1225, and that his custody is properly governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). D. 1 at 2. Petitioner, therefore, contends that his indefinite detention constitutes a violation of his constitutional due process rights. Id. He seeks his release from detention or, alternatively, a bond hearing. Id. at 3.Discussion. This Court has jurisdiction over the Petition as it concerns relief that Petitioner seeks challenging his continued detention. Kong v. United States, 62 F.4th 608, 614 (1st Cir. 2023) (noting that "we have held that district courts retain jurisdiction over challenges to the legality of detention in the immigration context"). Respondents contend that, because Petitioner has failed to plead sufficient facts, the Court should dismiss the Petition. D. 7 at 4-5. The Court disagrees with Respondents' characterization of the facts alleged by Petitioner. First, the Court notes that Petitioner included a declaration with his Petition, D. 1-3, which provides that Petitioner is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic, that he entered the United States on or around November 2020, that he is living in Lawrence, that he has strong ties in Massachusetts and that he has no criminal convictions, id. at 1; see Jimenez v. FCI Berlin, Warden, 799 F. Supp. 3d 59, 63 n.1 (D.N.H. 2025) (drawing the facts, in part, from attachments to the petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241). In other words, Petitioner's declaration covers his approximate date of entry, his home address, his nationality and his citizenship. Second, the Petition provides the legal bases for Petitioner's prayer for relief, i.e., his constitutional due process claim and his argument that he is not subject to mandatory detention. D. 1 at 1-3. Accordingly, the Court declines to dismiss the Petition. As to the relief sought, the Court notes that the parties agree that Petitioner is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226. D. 1 at 2; D. 7 at 6 (citing Dias De Carvalho v. Hyde et al., No. 25-cv-12677-DJC (D. Mass. Nov. 4, 2025), D. 14). In light of the foregoing, the facts are sufficient to determine that Petitioner is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (which allows for discretionary determination of custody before an immigration judge) and not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) (which provides for mandatory detention for "applicants for admission"). See Dias De Carvalho, No. 25-cv-12677-DJC, D. 14; cf. Loja Mayancela, No. 26-cv-11105-ADB (D. Mass. Mar. 24, 2026), D. 8. Accordingly, consistent with the Court's ruling in Dias De Carvalho, Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing. See Da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61, 71 (2d Cir. 2026) (affirming that petitioner's detention “is governed by Section 1226(a) and that he is entitled to a bond hearing . . . consistent with the decisions of . . . over ninety percent of district court judges"). Accordingly, the Court ALLOWS the Petition insofar as it sought a bond hearing/custody redetermination under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), at which the government bears the burden of proving Petitioner poses a danger to the community or flight risk, see Hernandez-Lara, 10 F.4th at 41, which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial. (SEC) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

Jun 12, 2026

Order

#9

Jun 22, 2026

Status Report

#11

Jun 29, 2026

Order Dismissing Case

Jun 29, 2026

Order