Ramos v. Warden Diamondback Correctional Facility et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
HUMBERTO RAMOS,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN DIAMONDBACK
CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, et al.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-26-2750-SLP
O R D E R
Petitioner, Humberto Ramos, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. No. 1]. Before the Court is Respondents’ Response to Order to
Show Cause [Doc. No. 9]. Respondents acknowledge that this matter is controlled by the
Tenth Circuit’s decision in Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin, 180 F.4th 1226, 1240 (10th Cir.
2026). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART the Petition [Doc. No. 1] as to
Petitioner’s statutory challenge to his detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(a).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petition [Doc. No. 1] is GRANTED IN
PART. Respondents are ORDERED to provide Petitioner with a proper bond hearing,
before an immigration judge, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven (7) days of the
date of this Order.1
1 Because the Court finds that habeas relief should be granted on Petitioner’s statutory claim, the
Court declines to address his remaining claims.
Case 5:26-cv-02750-SLP Document 7 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 2

2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall file a Notice of Compliance
on or before 5:00 p.m., on October 20, 2026. If Respondents fail to timely comply,
including a failure to timely file a Notice, Petitioner shall immediately be released from
custody. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241, 2243.2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents’ counsel is directed to provide a
copy of this Order to the warden of the facility where Petitioner is currently detained.
A separate judgment shall be entered.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of October, 2026.
2 “In issuing a writ of habeas corpus, a federal court has the power and authority to dispose of
habeas corpus matters as law and justice require.” Burton v. Johnson, 975 F.2d 690, 693 (10th Cir.
1992) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2243); Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 693 (2008) (“Habeas is a remedy
for unlawful executive detention. The typical remedy for such detention is, of course, release.”);
see also Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Thuraissigiam, 591 U.S. 103, 107 (2020) (“Habeas has
traditionally been a means to secure release from unlawful detention.”).
Case 5:26-cv-02750-SLP Document 7 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 2