Apollinaire v. Barr et al

Apollinaire v. Barr et al

Case Number:	6:2019cv06285
Filed:	June 25, 2019
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office:	Rochester Office
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 27, 2019	Filing 19 DECISION AND ORDER denying 10 Petitioner's Motion for Relief. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 8/26/2019. A copy of the NEF and this order have been mailed to the pro se Petitioner. (MFM)
June 25, 2019	Filing 7 DECISION AND ORDER: Petitioner is entitled to habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and the petition 1 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The petition is granted against Respondent Searls and is denied with respect to the remaining responde nts. By July 8, 2019, Respondent Searls shall hold a bond hearing for Petitioner before an immigration judge, at which the government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner's continued detention is justified based on risk of flight or danger to the community. If a bond hearing is not held by July 8, 2019, Respondent Searls shall release Petitioner immediately with appropriate conditions of supervision. By July 10, 2019, Respondent Searls shall file a notice with this Court certifying either (1) that a bond hearing was held by the applicable deadline, and the outcome thereof, or (2) that no bond hearing was held and that Petitioner was released with appropriate conditions of supervision. Th e Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and close this case. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 6/25/2019. A copy of the NEF and this order have been mailed to the pro se Petitioner.(MFM)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

Date Filed

Document Text

August 27, 2019

Filing 19 DECISION AND ORDER denying 10 Petitioner's Motion for Relief. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 8/26/2019. A copy of the NEF and this order have been mailed to the pro se Petitioner. (MFM)

June 25, 2019

Filing 7 DECISION AND ORDER: Petitioner is entitled to habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and the petition 1 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The petition is granted against Respondent Searls and is denied with respect to the remaining responde nts. By July 8, 2019, Respondent Searls shall hold a bond hearing for Petitioner before an immigration judge, at which the government bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner's continued detention is justified based on risk of flight or danger to the community. If a bond hearing is not held by July 8, 2019, Respondent Searls shall release Petitioner immediately with appropriate conditions of supervision. By July 10, 2019, Respondent Searls shall file a notice with this Court certifying either (1) that a bond hearing was held by the applicable deadline, and the outcome thereof, or (2) that no bond hearing was held and that Petitioner was released with appropriate conditions of supervision. Th e Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and close this case. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 6/25/2019. A copy of the NEF and this order have been mailed to the pro se Petitioner.(MFM)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP-

Access additional case information on PACER

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

Access this case on the New York Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Apollinaire v. Barr et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| 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?