Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

- 1 - 26cv4570
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
VICTOR ALFONZO PARRA-PARRA,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN, IMPERIAL REGIONAL
DETENTION FACILITY,
Respondent.
Case No. 26-cv-4570-BAS-MSB
ORDER GRANTING AMENDED
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS (ECF No. 11)
Petitioner Victor Alfonzo Parra-Parra filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, claiming he was improperly detained after he was
released into the United States. (ECF No. 11.) The Government opposed (ECF No. 15),
and Petitioner filed a Traverse (ECF No. 16). For the reasons stated below, the Court
GRANTS the Petition and orders that Petitioner be released on the same terms and
conditions as he was previously released.
I. 	LEGAL STANDARD
A writ of habeas corpus is “available to every individual detained within the United
States.” Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 525 (2004). “The traditional function of the writ
is to secure release from illegal custody.” Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 484 (1973).
Case 3:26-cv-04570-BAS-MSB Document 17 Filed 10/08/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 3

- 2 - 26cv4570
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A court may grant a writ of habeas corpus to a petitioner who demonstrates he or she is in
custody in violation of the Constitution or federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). It applies
to non-citizens detained within the United States. Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 687
(2001). Since Petitioner is in custody and since he is seeking release from custody, he has
standing to pursue this Petition.
II. 	STATEMENT OF FACTS
Petitioner, a citizen of Venezuela, entered the United States on October 24, 2022.
(ECF Nos. 11, 15.) He was released into the United States after Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (“ICE”) determined he was not a flight risk or danger to the community. (ECF
No. 11.) On November 25, 2024, Petitioner was granted Temporary Protected Status
(“TPS”). (Id.) The Government is attempting to revoke this TPS status for Venezuelans,
an attempt that is still being litigated. See Nat’l TPS All. v. Noem, 166 F.4th 739 (9th Cir.
2026), cert. granted and vacated for further proceedings, No. 26-48, 2026 WL 2976626
(U.S. Oct. 5, 2026); see also Mullin v. Doe, 609 U.S. 324, 350 (2026).
On July 14, 2025, ICE re-detained Petitioner without notice or an opportunity to be
heard and without any changed circumstances with respect to his flight risk or danger to
the community. (ECF No. 11.) Petitioner seeks immediate release on the same conditions
as he was previously released. (Id.)
III. 	ANALYSIS
Petitioner’s re-detention without notice or an opportunity to be heard, and without
noticeably changed circumstances, violates Petitioner’s due process rights. Individuals
released from custody, even where such release is conditional, have a liberty interest in
continued liberty. See, e.g., Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 482 (1972) (parolees);
Young v. Harper, 520 U.S. 143, 150 (1997) (pre-parolees); Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S.
778, 782 (1973) (probationers). Thus, this Court agrees with those courts that have held:
[O]nce a noncitizen has been released, the law prohibits federal agents from
rearresting him merely because he is subject to removal proceedings. Rather,
the federal agents must be able to present evidence of materially changed
circumstances—namely, evidence that the noncitizen is in fact dangerous or
Case 3:26-cv-04570-BAS-MSB Document 17 Filed 10/08/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 3

- 3 - 26cv4570
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
has become a flight risk, or is now subject to a final order of removal. And if
the noncitizen disputes the notion that changed circumstances justify his
rearrest, he is entitled to a prompt hearing before an Immigration Judge.
Saravia v. Sessions, 280 F. Supp. 3d 1168, 1176–77 (N.D. Cal. 2017); see also Kamalpreet
v. Singh, No. 26-cv-1211-LL-JLB, 2026 WL 622687, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2026)
(“Although the initial decision to detain or release an individual may be within the
government’s discretion, the government’s decision to release an individual from custody
creates an implicit promise, upon which that individual may rely, that their liberty will be
revoked only if they fail to live up to the conditions of release.” (citation modified) (quoting
Pinchi v. Noem, 792 F. Supp. 3d 1025, 1032 (N.D. Cal. 2025))). Although the Government
opposes Petitioner’s request for release, it fails to address Petitioner’s argument that his re-
detention without notice or an opportunity to be heard violated his due process rights. (ECF
No. 15.)
Because ICE released Petitioner upon finding he was not a flight risk or a danger to
the community in October of 2022, and because there is no evidence those circumstances
have changed, Petitioner is entitled to remain released on the same conditions as he was
initially released. If ICE believes circumstances have changed, it must provide notice of
these changed circumstances to Petitioner and provide Petitioner an opportunity to be heard
promptly before an Immigration Judge. Hence, the Court GRANTS the Amended Petition.
IV. 	CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Court issues the following writ:
The Court ORDERS that Victor Alfonzo Parra-Parra (A#234-244-407) be
released on the same terms and conditions on which he was previously
released in October 2022.
The Clerk of the Court shall close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 8, 2026
Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Case 3:26-cv-04570-BAS-MSB Document 17 Filed 10/08/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 3 of 3