Free Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

i _, ._ y Case 3:03-cv-00681-JBA Document 16 Filed 11/14/2003 Page1 of2
1 i
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT \
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT Qgi g·q ,
i ...1.. iw
De Dam ' : a , , v.
‘°*°“"’° . Nav M 12 Q3 ni; mg
v, Z NO. 3!O3CV681 {`1§$`{§~;{(j} {j{)LrR‘j‘ l
; Nw- %1A‘€&§2—f. €}0H?é_
Ashcroft, et al. :
Order |Doc. §15| E
On April 15, 2003, Petitioner Aymar De Dampierre filed a §
2241 petition asserting that his mandatory detention pursuant to é
INA § 236(c), 8 U.S.C. § l226(c), was unlawful, and requesting an
individualized bond determination by an immigration judge. See 1
[Doc. # 1]. On November 12, 2003, Respondents filed a letter with
this Court, along with supporting documentation, stating that on _
October 24, 2003, an immigration judge denied De Dampierre's
application for cancellation of removal and ordered him deported
g to his native France. See [Doc. # 15]. In addition, on October I
28, 2003, the immigration judge granted De Dempierre's motion to
withdraw reservation of appeal. See ig. Accordingly, De
Dampierre is now under an administratively final order of
1
1
removal, and is no longer being detained pursuant to § 236(c).1
1
1As an alien with an administratively final order of |
removal, De Dampierre is now being detained pursuant to INA §
241, 8 U.S.C. § 1231, which provides that "the Attorney General
shall remove the alien from the United States within a period of
90 days," and provides for detention during the removal period.
See also Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 618, 689 (2001), (construing
§ 241 to limit "an alien's post—removal—period detention to a
period reasonably necessary to bring about that alien's removal
from the United States.")
I 1
1
1
I K
! H1 ¤
lh
EM
| lll
5M
¤ EM
11)

lll
IU
1 i
E xi
i 1;|
5
laili
* iii
*1)

MM

'" " “ ~ Case 3:03-cv-00681-JBA Document 16 Filed 11/14/2003 Page 2 of2 {
i p The only claim before this Court was Petitioner's challenge
ite the mandatory detention provision in § 236(c), which, in light ·
of the foregoing, has been mooted. The Court construes .
Respondent's letter [Doc. # 15] as a motion to dismiss as moot
Petitioner‘s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and hereby é
GRANTS this motion. The petition is dismissed, and the Clerk is
directed to close this case.
ir is so osorsso. N
( i a ····~ ,
qjyet mono Arterton, U.S.D.J.
Dated at New Haven, Connecticut, this [I day of November, 2003.
l
u
H
E
Q
2
\
l
!
EH T
,