District Court, W.D. Louisiana, 2026

Rayko Diaz Martin v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement

Rayko Diaz Martin v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
District Court, W.D. Louisiana · Decided April 8, 2026
Rayko Diaz Martin v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION

RAYKO DIAZ MARTIN CIVIL ACTION NO. 26-1089 VERSUS JUDGE ALEXANDER C. VAN HOOK U.S. IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES ORDER Rayko Diaz Martin has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus and a motion for temporary restraining order. Record Documents 1, 2. The Magistrate Judge has already addressed Martin’s deficient habeas petition. See Record Document 4. Now, out of caution, the Court addresses the motion for temporary restraining order, and for the following reason, it is DENIED.

In his motion, Martin argued that his continued detention is unconstitutional under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) where the United States Supreme Court held that post-removal detention must be limited “to a period reasonably necessary to bring about that alien’s removal from the United States.” 533 U.S. at 689. To obtain Zadvydas relief, the petitioner “has the initial burden to show that post-removal-order detention has surpassed six months, and to ‘provide good cause to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Uriostegui Rios v. Trump, No. 25-1320, 2026 WL 810556, at *2 (W.D. La. Mar. 24, 2026).

Here, Martin has not met his initial burden for relief under Zaduydas. In his petition, Martin acknowledged that his final order of removal was not entered until January 7, 2026. Record Document 1, at 4. Because his final order of removal occurred less than six months ago, Martin’s continued detention remains “presumptively reasonable,” and his Zadvydas challenge is premature. Agyei-Kodie v. Holder, 418 F. App’x 317, 317 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding the challenge to “continued post removal order detention is premature” where the detainee “has not been in post-removal-order detention longer than the presumptively reasonable six month period[.]”).

DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 8th day of April, 2026.

hla Von oh UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.