District of New Mexico • 1:26-cv-01788

Melgar Rivera v. Ortiz

Completed

Case Information

Filed: June 03, 2026
Assigned to: Kea W Riggs
Referred to: Laura N. Fashing
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Completed: June 18, 2026
Last Activity: October 13, 2026
Parties: View All Parties →

Docket Entries

#1
Jun 03, 2026
PETITION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. 2241, filed by Rene Adrian Melgar Rivera. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit, # 7 Exhibit, # 8 Exhibit, # 9 Exhibit, # 10 Exhibit) (Balderas, Joel) (Entered: 06/03/2026)
Main Document: Petition for 2241 Relief
#2
Jun 03, 2026
NOTICE: In accordance with the Standing Order, filed January 28, 2026 in 26-MC-00004-03 (Doc. 3), the Clerk of Court provides notice of completion of electronic service. A copy of the petition in this matter was provided to all federal respondents by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system. The parties should review the Standing Order, and any further Orders entered in this matter regarding the deadline to respond to the petition. (bc)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (Entered: 06/03/2026)
#3
Jun 03, 2026
ORDER TO ANSWER by District Judge Kea W. Riggs: The USAO shall ANSWER the Petition within 10 business days. The Clerk's Office shall confirm that the docket lists the following Respondents: the facility Warden; Mary De Anda-Ybarra; Todd Lyons; Pamela Bondi; and Markwayne Mullin. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (cab) (Entered: 06/03/2026)
Jun 03, 2026
Order
Jun 03, 2026
United States District Judge Kea W. Riggs and United States Magistrate Judge Laura Fashing assigned. (bc)
#4
Jun 12, 2026
Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 1011030 (bp)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (Entered: 06/12/2026)
Jun 12, 2026
Filing Fee Received
#5
Jun 17, 2026
NOTICE of Appearance by Ryan Posey on behalf of Pamela Bondi, Mary De Anda-Ybarra, Joel Garcia, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin (Posey, Ryan) (Entered: 06/17/2026)
Main Document: NOTICE
#6
Jun 17, 2026
RESPONSE to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus re 1 Petition for 2241 Relief, filed by Pamela Bondi, Mary De Anda-Ybarra, Joel Garcia, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin. (Posey, Ryan) (Entered: 06/17/2026)
Main Document: Response (when not to a motion)
#7
Jun 18, 2026
ORDER by District Judge Kea W. Riggs granting in part 1 Petition for 2241 Relief, filed by Rene Adrian Melgar Rivera. (arp) (Entered: 06/18/2026)
Main Document: Order
#8
Jun 18, 2026
JUDGMENT by District Judge Kea W. Riggs. (arp) (Entered: 06/18/2026)
Main Document: Judgment
#9
Jun 24, 2026
STATUS REPORT by Rene Adrian Melgar Rivera (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1 - Bond Order, # 2 Exhibit Ex 2 - Bond Motion, # 3 Exhibit Ex 3 - Bond Hearing Transcript) (Balderas, Joel) (Entered: 06/24/2026)
Main Document: Status Report
#10
Jun 29, 2026
RESPONSE to Petitioner's Status Report re 9 Status Report filed by Pamela Bondi, Mary De Anda-Ybarra, Joel Garcia, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Amended Order of the IJ) (Posey, Ryan) (Entered: 06/29/2026)
Main Document: Response (when not to a motion)
#11
Oct 13, 2026
ORDER by District Judge Kea W. Riggs: The Court has reviewed the docket and the record before the Court. The Court granted in part Petitioner's habeas petition and ordered Respondents to hold an individualized bond hearing. Respondents held an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge, who denied bond or release, finding that Petitioner is a danger to the community and/or flight risk. Now, Petitioner requests that the Court enforce its judgment and order his release. Petitioner fails to demonstrate that the immigration judge did not hold an individualized bond hearing in compliance with the Court's order. The Court "retains jurisdiction to enforce its lawful judgments, including habeas judgments." Gall v. Scroggy, 603 F.3d 346, 352 (6th Cir. 2010); Burton v. Johnson, 975 F.2d 690, 693 (10th Cir. 1992) (explaining that district court has authority to enforce its habeas judgment). And the Court has jurisdiction over constitutional challenges to the application of § 1226. See Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510, 516-17 (2003) (holding that "Section 1226(e) contains no explicit provision barring habeas review, and... its clear text does not bar [a petitioner's] constitutional challenge"); Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 295 (2018). And the Court has jurisdiction over constitutional challenges brought by detainees as to their detention. But the Court does not have jurisdiction to review an immigration judge's discretionary bond decision. Under § 1226(e), "[n]o court may set aside any action or decision by the Attorney General under [§ 1226] regarding the detention or release of any alien or the grant, revocation, or denial of bond or parole." "This provision precludes the Court from reviewing the IJ's decision that denied bond because Petitioner was a flight risk." Mwangi v. Terry, 465 F. App'x 784, 786-87 (10th Cir. 2012) ("Therefore, to the extent Mr. Mwangi challenges the agency's discretionary bond decision, the magistrate judge was correct that the court lacked jurisdiction."). Here, an immigration judge held an individualized bond hearing and complied with the Court's order. In the alternative, assuming the Court has jurisdiction, the Court would not set aside the immigration judge's decision. However, the Court has jurisdiction to consider constitutional violations at the bond hearing. A fundamental aspect of due process is notice and the opportunity to be heard. See In re C.W. Mining Co., 625 F.3d 1240, 1244 (10th Cir. 2010) ("The Supreme Court has consistently held that due process requires notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard."). A noncitizen is entitled at least to fundamental fairness at a bond hearing. "An alien: (1) is entitled to factfinding based on a record produced before the decisionmaker and disclosed to him or her; (2) must be allowed to make arguments on his or her own behalf; and (3) has the right to an individualized determination of his [or her] interests." Ghanem v. Warden Essex Cnty. Corr. Facility, No. 21-1908, 2022 WL 574624, at *2 (3d Cir. Feb. 25, 2022) (unpublished). Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the immigration judge violated the constitution at the bond hearing or failed to comply with the Court's order. All pending motions are denied. THIS IS A TEXT ONLY ENTRY, NO DOCUMENTS ARE ATTACHED (cab) (Entered: 10/13/2026)
Oct 13, 2026
Order