Sacko v. Gonzales

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
May 17, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-30096
Summary Calendar
MOUSTAPHA SACKO,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES,
Respondent-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
(2:05-CV-264)
_________________________________________________________________
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Moustapha Sacko, an immigration detainee, filed a 28 U.S.C. §
2241 petition in which he challenged his pre-removal detention by
the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He now appeals
the district court’s holding he failed to demonstrate there was no
reasonable likelihood of removal in the foreseeable future.
According to Sacko, his continued detention beyond six months
violates the rule from Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001).

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
It appears the district court did not err in concluding Sacko
hampered the Government’s efforts to remove him. We need not reach
that issue, however. Instead, we note the district court ordered
the Government to obtain travel documents from Burundi within six
months. That period has now passed, rendering moot any dispute
over the rationale for the district court’s order of continued
detention. Therefore, we vacate and remand to the district court
to determine whether, given the current status of the case, “there
is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably
foreseeable future”. Id. at 701; see also Gul v. Rozos, 163 F.
App’x 317 (5th Cir. 2006).
VACATED AND REMANDED

-- 2 of 2 --