Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Koat v. United States

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

October 23, 2019

MAWEA KOAT, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RICK CONRAD, Hall County Sheriff, Respondents.

          Joseph P. Kelly United States Attorney District of Nebraska.

          Martin Klein Hall County Attorney.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          RICHARD G. KOPF SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This unusual matter is before the court on preliminary review of Petitioner Mawea Koat's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing No. 1) brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.[1] The purpose of this review is to determine whether Petitioner's claims, when liberally construed, are potentially cognizable in federal court. Condensed and summarized for clarity, Petitioner's claims are:

B>Claim One: The Petitioner has been and is being indefinitely confined in violation of the laws of the United States, particularly the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Fourth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
B>Claim Two: The Petitioner has been deprived of Due Process of law regarding the issuance of the Notice of Failure to Comply Pursuant to 8 CFR 241.4(g) dated October 1, 2019 (attached to the petition) in part because Petitioner is a citizen of Ethiopia and not South Sudan as erroneously determined by the Deputy Field Office Director.
B>Claim Three: Since there is no possibility that Petitioner will be received in his country of origin or any other foreign country in the foreseeable future, Petitioner is being denied Due Process of law by the failure to parole him under supervision.

         The court determines that these claims, when liberally construed, are potentially cognizable in federal court. However, the court cautions Petitioner that no determination has been made regarding the merits of these claims or any defenses to them or whether there are procedural bars that will prevent Petitioner from obtaining the relief sought.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

         1. Upon initial review of the habeas corpus petition (Filing No. 1), the court preliminarily determines that Petitioner's claims, as they are set forth in this Memorandum and Order, are potentially cognizable in federal court.

         2. The Clerk shall modify the docket sheet and show the above named Respondents as the only Respondents. The Clerk shall telephone the offices of the following attorneys and advise them of the filing of this case and the issuance of this Memorandum and Order. After that, the Clerk shall serve the petition (filing no. 1) and this document on the following lawyers by United States Mail:

         3. By December 7, 2019, Respondents must file motions for summary judgment or records in support of their answers. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: December 7, 2019: deadline for Respondents to file records in support of answers or motions for summary judgment.

         4. If Respondents elect to file motions for summary judgment, the following procedures must be followed by Respondents and Petitioner:

         A. The motions for summary judgment must be accompanied by separate briefs, submitted ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.