Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-08190

#1

Oct 05, 2026

2241 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against ICE/ERO, Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, Tonya Andrews, David Venturella by Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#2

Oct 05, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#3

Oct 05, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#4

Oct 05, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#5

Oct 06, 2026

ORDER AUTHORIZING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS as to Jean Joseph Mondesir signed by Visiting Judge Micah WJ Smith on 10/06/2026. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#6

Oct 06, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#7

Oct 06, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Elisa M. Rodriguez for Tonya Andrews,Elisa M. Rodriguez for Todd Blanche,Elisa M. Rodriguez for ICE/ERO,Elisa M. Rodriguez for Markwayne Mullin,Elisa M. Rodriguez for David Venturella (Rodriguez, Elisa) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

#8

Oct 06, 2026

EO: The court has received and reviewed Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Dkt. No. 1, and petition for temporary restraining order, Dkt. No. 4 . The court intends to rule on the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243 ("The court shall summarily hear and determine the facts, and dispose of [a petitioner's habeas petition] as law and justice require."). On or before October 8, 2026, Respondents are ORDERED to answer in writing the following questions:1. Is Petitioner subject to a final order of removal? If so, after being ordered removed, was Petitioner released under an order of supervision or otherwise released from custody by immigration authorities? If Petitioner was released, are there any factual or legal bases to distinguish this case from cases like Afshin A.N. v. Chestnut, No. CV 1:26-cv-03813-MWJS, 2026 WL 1726781 (E.D. Cal. June 15, 2026)?2. In Respondents' view, is Petitioner subject to mandatory detention pursuant to any provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act other than 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)? If the answer is yes, what is the relevant detention authority and why do Respondents think that it applies to Petitioner?3. Other than the circumstances covered by the first question, was Petitioner otherwise ever detained and released by immigration authorities? If the answer is yes, what were the circumstances of that release, and are there any factual or legal bases to distinguish this case from the many prior cases in which other petitioners in a variety of circumstances have been granted immediate release? See, e.g., Maxo Ben G. v. Warden of Mesa Verde Det. Facility, No. 1:26-cv-03776-MWJS, 2026 WL 1457554 (E.D. Cal. May 21, 2026); Kallebe C.L. v. Warden, Cal. City Corr. Ctr., No. 1:26-cv-03651-MWJS, 2026 WL 1374754 (E.D. Cal. May 14, 2026); A.J.S.M.P. v. Mullin, No. 1:26-cv-03163-MWJS, 2026 WL 1190220 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2026); Sergio D.L.S. v. Warden, Cal. City Corr. Ctr., No. 1:26-cv-02821-MWJS, 2026 WL 1049713 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2026).4. If Petitioner was not previously detained and released by immigration authorities, are there any factual or legal bases to distinguish this case from the many prior cases in which other petitioners have been granted bond hearings? See, e.g., Juana G.R.P. v. Warden of the Cal. City Det. Facility, No. 1:26-cv-04406-MWJS, 2026 WL 1712375 (E.D. Cal. June 12, 2026); Bertoldo B.F. v. Warden, Cal. City Immigr. Processing Ctr., No. 1:26-cv-03634-MWJS, 2026 WL 1638322 (E.D. Cal. June 4, 2026)?5. Was Petitioner previously granted a bond hearing before an immigration judge? If the answer is yes, when was that hearing held, what was the outcome, and what was the reasoning underlying the immigration judge's decision?6. Petitioner may file a reply on or before October 13, 2026. This matter is not set for a hearing though the court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. Given the court's ongoing consideration of the petition, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that Respondents shall not transfer or otherwise take Petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction"). IT IS SO ORDERED.(JUDGE MICAH W. J. SMITH) (ab) (Entered: 10/06/2026)

Oct 06, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: A copy of Dkt. No. 8 Entering Order, was served on Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk AB)

Oct 06, 2026

Service by Mail

Oct 06, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Immigration New Case Documents, 5 Order Authorizing IFP Status, Order on Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis served on Jean Joseph Mondesir. (Deputy Clerk SZ)

Oct 06, 2026

Minute Order

#10

Oct 08, 2026

ORDER signed by District Judge Micah W. J. Smith on 10/8/2026 GRANTING petition for writ of habeas corpus, Dkt. No. 1 . Respondents must IMMEDIATELY RELEASE Jean Joseph Mondesir (A# 233-992-096) from custody under the same conditions that governed h is release prior to his current detention. Respondent must file a notice certifying compliance with this provision of the court's order within two court days from the date of the order. Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent compliance with constitutional protections. (cc: Golden State Annex) CASE CLOSED. (Deputy Clerk AB)

#11

Oct 08, 2026

Judgment

Oct 08, 2026

Service by Mail