govinfo:USCOURTS-caed-1_26-cv-04195-0

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 
 
 
 
 
1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
YUNIOR SAIZ-GARCIA, 
Petitioner, 
v. 
WARDEN, CENTRAL VALLEY ANNEX, 
Respondents. 
No. 1:26-cv-04195-DJC-AC 
 
RELEASE ORDER 
A# 241-700-271 
Petitioner Yunior Saiz-Garcia is an immigration detainee proceeding with a 
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) and Motion for Temporary Restraining 
Order (ECF No. 2). The Court has previously addressed the legal issues raised in the 
Petition. See Garcia Mariagua v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01744-DJC-CSK, 2025 WL 
3551700 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2025); Ortega v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-01663-DJC-CKD, 
2025 WL 3511914 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2025); Lopez v. Lyons, No. 2:25-cv-03174-DJC-
CKD, 2025 WL 3124116 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2025). 
The Court informed the parties that it intended to rule directly on the petition 
and ordered Respondents to show cause as to whether there are any factual or legal 
issues in this case that distinguish it from the Court’s prior orders. (ECF No. 5.) 
Neither party objected to the Court ruling directly on the merits of the petition. 
Respondents do not identify any substantive factual or legal distinctions between this 

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 
 
 
 
 
2 
 
case and the Court’s prior orders. (See ECF No. 6.) While Respondents note that 
Petitioner was transferred from state custody in connection with possible state criminal 
charges, the records provided show that the prosecutor rejected the charges against 
Petitioner. (Id. at 22–23.) The Court affords little weight to the fact that Petitioner was 
held by state authorities on potential charges that were ultimately rejected for filing by 
a prosecutor. 
Accordingly, as Respondents have not made any new legal arguments and 
have not identified any factual or legal issues in this case that would distinguish it from 
the Court’s prior decisions cited above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition for 
Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED for the reasons stated in those prior 
orders. 
Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release Petitioner Yunior Saiz-
Garcia from their custody. Respondents shall not impose any additional restrictions 
on Petitioner, unless that is determined to be necessary at a future pre-
deprivation/custody hearing. Respondents are permanently ENJOINED AND 
RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent compliance with 
constitutional protections, which include, at a minimum, pre-deprivation notice 
describing the change of circumstances necessitating Petitioner’s arrest and 
detention, and a timely hearing. At any such hearing, the Government shall bear the 
burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that Petitioner poses a 
danger to the community or a risk of flight, and Petitioner shall be allowed to have 
their counsel present. This Order does not address the circumstances in which 
Respondents may detain Petitioner in the event Petitioner becomes subject to an 
executable final order of removal. 
Respondents shall file a status report within five (5) days confirming Petitioner’s 
release. 
The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve Central Valley Annex with a copy of 
this Order. 

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 Clerk of the Court is further directed to close this case and enter judgment 
for Petitioner. This Order resolves all pending motions. 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
Dated: June 10, 2026 
Hon. Daniel J. Calabretta 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 

Passage view · GavelSight