Fuentes-Santos v. Schmidt

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ALBERTO JOVANY FUENTES-SANTOS, Petitioner, v. Case No. 25-CV-1359 SHERIFF DALE J. SCHMIDT, Respondent.

ORDER

Alberto Jovany Fuentes-Santos is incarcerated at the Dodge County Detention Center pending removal by immigration officials. According to documents appended to his petition, Fuentes-Santos was removed from the United States on February 21, 2018. (ECF No. 1-1 at 4.) He returned to the United States and was apparently convicted of a federal crime because he ended up being incarcerated at the Oxford Federal Correctional Institution. (ECF No. 1-1 at 5.) He was released from Oxford on February 20, 2025, and transferred to the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). (ECF No. 1-1 at 5.) ICE decided to reinstate the prior order of removal (ECF No. 1-1 at 4) and detained him at the Dodge County Detention Center pending removal. On May 8, 2025, ICE issued a Decision to Continue Detention. (ECF No. 1-1 at 1-2.)

Fuentes-Santos filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2241, which this court must now review to determine if it is sufficient to proceed.

See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Civ. L.R. 9(a)2) (applying the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases to petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241); Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Nkufi v. United States Immigr. & Customs Enf't, No. 24-cv-676-pp, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96659, at *3 (E.D. Wis. May 21, 2025). The gist of Fuentes-Santos’s claim is that he has been in custody since February 20, 2025, but has not received a bond hearing. He is not even scheduled for an initial hearing. He seeks release on bond or at least a bond hearing as soon as possible. (ECF No. 1 at 7.)

The precise nature of Fuentes-Santos’s detention and the status of the removal proceedings is unclear from his petition. But his petition may present the sort of due process claim that the Supreme Court recognized in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). See also Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, 596 U.S. 573, 584 (2022). Therefore, the court cannot say that it plainly appears that Fuentes-Santos is not entitled to relief, see Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The respondent must respond to the petition.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within 28 days of this order, the respondent shall show cause why the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner may reply no later than 21 days thereafter.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the petition and this order upon the respondent, Dale J. Schmidt.

Dated at Green Bay, Wisconsin this 9th day of September, 2025. s/ Byron B. Conway BYRON B. CONWAY United States District Judge