Shaukat v. Holder et al, No. 4:2010cv00265 - Document 10 (S.D. Tex. 2010)
Court Description: OPINION ON DISMISSAL.(Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(htippen, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ADNAN MALIK SHAUKAT, A-78-998-991, Petitioner, v. ERIC HOLDER, et al., Respondents. § § § § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. H-10-0265 OPINION ON DISMISSAL Petitioner Adnan Malik Shaukat filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 2241, challenging his continued detention by the Department of Homeland Security. (Docket Entry No.1). Respondents have filed a motion to dismiss the petition because petitioner has now been released from custody. (Docket Entry No.6). Petitioner has not filed a response to the motion. The jurisdiction of the federal courts is limited under Article III, section 2 of the Constitution to the adjudication of actual, live cases and controversies. U.S. CONST. Art. III; Alwan v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 507, 511 (5th Cir. 2004). When a habeas petitioner has been released from custody, the Court can continue to exercise jurisdiction over the petition only if the petitioner demonstrates some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration. Zalawadia v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 2004) (quoting Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)). In other words, the petitioner must show that some collateral consequence of the litigation s outcome persists. Alwan, 388 F.3d at 511 (quoting Spencer, 523 U.S. at 8). In his original petition, petitioner challenged the constitutionality of his continued detention pending removal to Pakistan. (Docket Entry No.1). Although petitioner is still subject 1 to the final removal order, he is no longer detained by the Department of Homeland Security. Therefore, his personal stake in the outcome of this action securing his release from federal custody is moot. Accordingly, respondents Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry No.6) is GRANTED. All pending motions are DENIED, AS MOOT. This habeas action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE . It is SO ORDERED. SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 19th day of May, 2010. ___________________________________ MELINDA HARMON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
