govinfo:USCOURTS-casd-3_26-cv-03418-1

1 
3:26-cv-3418-JES-BJW 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
LEONET RICARDO GAMEZ 
SABOGAL, 
Petitioner, 
v. 
TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney 
General of the United States, Department 
of Justice; MARKWAYNE MULLIN, 
Secretary of Homeland Security; DAVID 
J. VENTURELLA, Senior Official 
Performing the Duties of the Director of 
U.S. Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement; PATRICK DIVVER, Field 
Office Director of the San Diego 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
Office; JORGE VELARDE, Assistant 
Field Office Director of the Immigration 
and Customs Enforcement, Otay Mesa 
Detention Center; CHRISTOPHER J. 
LAROSE; Senior Warden, Otay Mesa 
Detention Center, 
Respondents. 

 
ORDER GRANTING PETITION 
FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241 
 
[ECF No. 1] 
// 
// 
Case 3:26-cv-03418-JES-BJW Document 5 Filed 06/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 5
 
2 
3:26-cv-3418-JES-BJW 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
Before the Court is Petitioner Leonet Ricardo Gamez Sabogal’s (“Petitioner”) 
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”). ECF No. 1, (“Pet.”). Pursuant to the 
Court’s Order to Show Cause, Respondents (the “Government”) filed the Response, which 
expressed its non-opposition to the Court ordering Petitioner’s bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1226(a). ECF No. 2; ECF No. 4 at 2. The Court has taken the matter under submission 
and for the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the Petition. 
I. BACKGROUND 
Petitioner is a 37- year-old Venezuelan national who entered the United States, 
without inspection or admission , on or about December 15, 2022, and has since been 
gainfully employed. Pet. ¶¶ 1–2, 18. On April 19, 2026, while driving in Miami, Florida, 
Petitioner was pulled over for a traffic violation by local law enforcement. Id. ¶ 19. Police 
searched his vehicle and found a marijuana vape pen; because Petitioner did not possess a 
medical license required to possess such an item under Florida law, he was arrested. Id . 
Petitioner paid his bail on April 21, 2026, but instead of being released, he was transferred 
to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. Id. 
Petitioner was, thereafter, transferred through multiple Florida detention facilities 
before being brought to the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego, California, where 
he remains in custody. Id . ¶ 20. The Government subsequently initiated removal 
proceedings against Petitioner, charging him as inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 
1182(a)(6)(A)(i). Id. ¶ 21. Petitioner brings this action, alleging his detention violates the 
Immigration and Naturalization Act. Id. ¶¶ 26-27. 
II. LEGAL STANDARD 
A writ of habeas corpus is "available to every individual detained within the United 
States." Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525 (2004) (citing U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 
2). "The essence of habeas corpus is an attack by a person in custody upon the legality of 
that custody, and . . . the traditional function of the writ is to secure release from illegal 
custody." Preiser v. Rodriguez , 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973). A court may grant a writ of 
habeas corpus to a petitioner who demonstrates he is in custody in violation of the 
Case 3:26-cv-03418-JES-BJW Document 5 Filed 06/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 5
 
3 
3:26-cv-3418-JES-BJW 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
Constitution or federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). Challenges to immigration- related 
detention are within the purview of a district court's habeas jurisdiction. Zadvydas v. Davis, 
533 U.S. 678, 687 (2001); see also Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510, 517 (2003). 
III. DISCUSSION 
The Court finds that the Petition’s issues— specifically, the Court’s jurisdiction and 
which statute governs Petitioner’s detention—are analogous to those raised in the Court’s 
decision in Martinez Lopez v. Noem, et al., No. 25-cv-2717-JES-AHG, 2025 WL 3030457, 
at *2–7 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2025). The Court, therefore, elects to follow the reasoning stated 
therein and incorporates it by reference. Id. 
A. Jurisdiction 
The Court finds that 8 U.S.C. § 1252's jurisdiction-stripping provisions do not bar it 
from considering this habeas petition. Id . Moreover, the prudential administrative 
exhaustion requirement for 28 U.S.C. § 2241 claims is excused. Id . Imposing that 
requirement would be futile given the BIA's precedential decision in Matter of Yajure 
Hurtado, which held that noncitizens who entered without inspection are subject to 
mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) regardless of where or when they were 
apprehended. 29 I&N Dec. 216, at *4–5. (BIA 2025). Accordingly, the Court finds that it 
has jurisdiction to hear the Petition. 
B. Section 1226(a) Governs Petitioner's Detention 
Although the Ninth Circuit stayed application of the Maldonado Bautista class 
certification to prospective members outside the Central District of California, this Court’s 
rulings, when analyzing habeas cases with similar circumstances, have consistently been 
aligned with Maldonado Bautista 's holding. See Maldonado Bautista v. U.S. Dep't of 
Homeland Sec., No. 26-1044 (9th Cir. Mar. 6, 2026); see, e.g., Velazquez-Beltran v. Noem, 
No. 3:26-CV-959-JES-MSB, 2026 WL 524056, at *2–3 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2026) (holding 
that noncitizens that entered the country without inspection and w ere not immediately 
apprehended near the border are subject to immigration detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), 
not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b); Murillo-Ortiz v. LaRose, No. 3:26-CV-1469-JES-BJW, 2026 WL 
Case 3:26-cv-03418-JES-BJW Document 5 Filed 06/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
3 of 5
 
4 
3:26-cv-3418-JES-BJW 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
800556, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2026) (holding same); Jasbir v. Warden, Imperial Reg'l 
Adult Det. Facility, No. 26-CV-579-JES-BJW, 2026 WL 353354, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 
2026) (holding same). 
Here, Petitioner was not apprehended at or near the border. Pet. ¶ 1. He has resided 
in the United States and has been in Respondents’ custody since April 21, 2026, well after 
entering the country in 2022 . Id. ¶¶ 1, 9. These facts make clear that Petitioner "was not 
actively entering, attempting to enter or had recently entered, the country when 
apprehended." Martinez Lopez, 2025 WL 3030457, at *6. Accordingly, the Court finds that 
8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b), governs Petitioner's detention. 
C. Petitioner Is Entitled to a Bond Hearing 
Noncitizens that are arrested and detained, pending a removal decision, may apply 
for release on bond or conditional parole. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226(a)(2)(A) –(B). If the 
Government denies that request, the noncitizen may seek a bond hearing before an 
Immigration Judge. See 8 C.F.R. § 236.1(d)(1); Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, 594 U.S. 523, 
527 (2021). 
As the Court has found that 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) applies to Petitioner's detention, and 
given the absence of any opposition from Respondents, Petitioner is entitled to, and shall 
receive, an individualized bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). See Aparicio Juan v. 
LaRose, No. 3:26-cv -2099-JES-BJW (S.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2026) (granting petition and 
ordering bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) on materially identical facts); see ECF No. 
4 at 2. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
Based on the foregoing: 
(1) The Court ORDERS the Government to provide the noncitizen with a 
bond determination hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), within fourteen 
(14) days of this Order, unless the noncitizen requests a continuance; 
(2) At the bond hearing, the Government may not deny the noncitizen bond, 
solely on the basis that he is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2);
 
Case 3:26-cv-03418-JES-BJW Document 5 Filed 06/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
4 of 5
 
5 
3:26-cv-3418-JES-BJW 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
(3) The Government is ORDERED to FILE a Notice of Compliance 
within five (5) days of providing Petitioner with a bond redetermination 
hearing; and 
(4) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE this suit. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 12, 2026 
 
 
 
 
Case 3:26-cv-03418-JES-BJW Document 5 Filed 06/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
5 of 5

Passage view · GavelSight