Yuniesky Garcia Camba v. Warden, Ste. Genevieve County Detention Center, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION YUNIESKY GARCIA CAMBA, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 1:26-cv-00103-MTS ) WARDEN, STE. GENEVIEVE COUNTY ) DETENTION CENTER, et al., ) ) Respondents. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Yuniesky Garcia Camba has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, claiming that he has been confined in the Ste. Genevieve County Detention Center by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement since March 26, 2026. Doc. [1]. After a complete review of his filings, the Court determines that precedent of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit forecloses the habeas relief he seeks.1 Avila v. Bondi, 170 F.4th 1128, 1132 (8th Cir. 2026); Lugo- Solet v. Mullin, 1:26-cv-0052-ZMB, 2026 WL 1162233, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Apr. 29, 2026) (citing Banyee v. Garland, 115 F.4th 928, 933 (8th Cir. 2024)). It therefore “plainly appears” that Petitioner “is not entitled to relief,” and the Court accordingly Petitioner also purports to bring a claim for “Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs” regarding his chronic hypertension. Doc. [1] at 6. He cannot bring such a claim in a habeas petition. See Kruger v. Erickson, 77 F.3d 1071, 1073–74 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam); Pinson v. Berkebile, 486 F. App’x 745, 747 (10th Cir. 2012). Petitioner remains free, under the strictures of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b), to bring “a civil rights claim or possibly a Federal Tort Claims Act claim against the United States,” if he chooses to do so. See Glaus v. Anderson, 408 F.3d 382, 387 (7th Cir. 2005). will enter an Order of Dismissal herewith. See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.”

Dated this 14th day of May 2026. Th ful T. SCHELP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ? Under Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, the Rules generally apply to § 2241 petitions. _2-