Atencio v. Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility
Petitioner: Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio
Respondent: Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility
Case Number: 1:2026cv04007
Filed: August 28, 2026
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
Presiding Judge: Charlotte N Sweeney
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in - Habeas Corpus: INS
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 23, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 23, 2026 Filing 19 RETURN Certified Mail Receipt of Service upon Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility (sphil, )
October 23, 2026 Filing 18 AFFIDAVIT/RETURN of Service RETURN Certified Mail Receipt of Service upon the United States Attorney General (sphil, )
October 19, 2026 Filing 17 Mail Returned as Undeliverable re: 12 Minute Order, #15 Judgment, 14 Minute Order, Addressed to Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (cange, )
October 8, 2026 Filing 16 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN Receipt as to Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility re: #9 Certificate of Service (agryan)
October 5, 2026 Filing 15 FINAL JUDGMENT: #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 is GRANTED. The petitioner is awarded costs, to be taxed by the Clerk of Court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1), D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1 and 28 U.S.C. 2412(a)(1). By Clerk on 10/5/26. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (jdyne, )
October 5, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 14 MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to the Court's Order, ECF No 12, and the representations made in the Status Report, ECF No. #13 , the Clerk of Court is directed to enter final judgment and close this case. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 10/5/26. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (jdyne, )
October 5, 2026 Filing 13 STATUS REPORT by Respondent Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility. (Isler, Thomas)
October 1, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 12 MINUTE ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner's habeas application, ECF No. 1, and Respondent's response to it, ECF No. 11. In the response, Respondent states that he is "not submitting a brief in opposition to the Petition detailing the facts and circumstances of this case." Id. at 1. In light of the representation in Respondent's response, as well as the Tenth Circuit's recent decision holding that 1225's mandatory detention provision does not apply to noncitizens who are apprehended while in the interior of the United States, see Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin, et. al, 180 F.4th 1226, 1246 (10th Cir. 2026), the Court GRANTS Petitioner's habeas application, ECF No. 1. It is ORDERED that Respondent shall release Petitioner from custody immediately, but no later than within 48 hours of this Order, and may not impose any additional conditions of release or supervision beyond those Petitioner was subject to immediately prior to his recent detention. Respondent SHALL FILE a status report within THREE DAYS of this Order to certify compliance. Respondent is further ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining Petitioner unless Respondent demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence at a pre-deprivation bond hearing, that Petitioner is a flight risk or danger to the community such that h physical custody is legally justified. At any such bond hearing, the government shall bear the burden of proof. The Court notes that Respondent acknowledges that release is the appropriate remedy in this case. ECF No. 11 at 1 ("The Court should order appropriate relief in the form of Petitioner's release from custody."). See also Santillan Quiroz, 180 F.4th at 1251 n.13; Singh v. Baltazar, 819 F. Supp. 3d 1247, 125051 (D. Colo. 2026). By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 10/1/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (cnsja, )
September 30, 2026 Filing 11 RESPONSE to 8 Order on Motion for TRO,,,,,,,,, by Respondent Warden, Denver Contract Detention FacilityAttorney Thomas Alan Isler added to party Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility(pty:res). (Isler, Thomas)
September 28, 2026 Filing 10 Acknowledgment of Service on behalf of the United States Attorneys Office for the District of Colorado.(sphil, )
September 25, 2026 Filing 9 CERTIFICATE of Service by Clerk of Court re #1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 8 Order to Show cause for Service of Process. (Attachments: #1 USPS Certified Mail Receipt) (sphil, )
September 25, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 8 MINUTE ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241, ECF No. #1 , in which Petitioner requests immediate release from immigration detention or, in the alternative, that the Court order Respondent to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing, id. at 8. Also before the Court is Petitioner's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. #2 , in which Petitioner asks the Court to promptly consider his petition, id. at 78. Petitioner's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, ECF No. #2 , is GRANTED. Having reviewed the petition, the Court will order the Clerk of Court to effectuate service on Respondent. Counsel for Respondent shall promptly enter a notice of appearance. Within five (5) calendar days of service, Respondent is ORDERED TO RESPOND to the Petition and are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the Petition should not be granted. See, e.g., Yassine v. Collins, No. 1:25-cv-00786-ADA-SH, 2025 WL 1954064, at *1 (W.D. Tex. July 7, 2025) (explaining that while 2243 refers to a three day deadline, this requirement is "subordinate to the district court's authority to set deadlines" itself, and granting respondents a fourteen day deadline to respond in order to "give [r]espondents adequate time to brief the issues" (quotations omitted)). Further, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. 1651(a), and in order to preserve the Court's jurisdiction, Respondent SHALL NOT REMOVE Petitioner from the District of Colorado or the United States unless or until this Court or the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit vacates this Order. See also Vizguerra-Ramirez v. Choate, et. al, Case No. 1:25-cv-881, D. Colo., ECF No. 11 at 45 (collecting cases); F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 603 (1966); Local 1814, Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n v. New York Shipping Ass'n, 965 F.2d 1224, 1237 (2d Cir. 1992). By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 9/25/26. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry(jdyne, )
September 25, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER Drawing Case. After review under D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1, the Court has determined that this case does not appear to be appropriate for summary dismissal. Therefore, the case will be drawn to a presiding judge and, if applicable, to a magistrate judge. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(c). Accordingly, this case is randomly reassigned to Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney, and drawn to Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella for all further proceedings. All future pleadings should be designated as 26-cv-04007-CNS, by Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley on 09/25/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (agryan)
September 8, 2026 Filing 6 Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number 119419. (jberr, )
September 8, 2026 Filing 5 Letter re: Filing Fee Payment (agryan)
August 28, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER Directing Petitioner to Cure Deficiencies. It is ordered that Petitioner cure the deficiencies designated within thirty (30) days from the date of this order. If Petitioner fails to cure all designated deficiencies within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, the action will be dismissed without further notice. The dismissal shall be without prejudice, by Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley on 08/28/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (agryan)
August 27, 2026 Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley for Initial Review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1 (b). Text Only Entry. (alxu, )
August 27, 2026 Filing 2 EMERGENCY MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction by Petitioner Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio. (alxu, )
August 27, 2026 Filing 1 APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 USC 2241, filed by Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Memorandum of Law, #3 Declaration, #4 Exhibits, #5 Envelope)(alxu, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Atencio v. Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Slhass Sebastian Tovar Atencio
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Warden, Denver Contract Detention Facility
Represented By: Thomas Alan Isler
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?