Rodriguez

Roberto Maceo Rodriguez v. Warden, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 20263:25-cv-03626California505 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Roberto MACEO RODRIGUEZ, Case No.: 25-cv-3626-AGS-MSB Petitioner, ORDER REQUIRING ANSWER v. WARDEN, et al., Respondents. 8 Self-represented petitioner Roberto Maceo Rodriguez seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to free him from immigration detention. (See ECF 1.) At this stage, he need only make out a claim that is sufficiently cognizable to warrant a response. See Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, Rule 4 (authorizing summary dismissal “if it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief”); id., Rule 1(b) (permitting application of Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases to any “habeas corpus petition”). In this context, the relevant federal rules permit “summary dismissal of claims that are clearly not cognizable.” Neiss v. Bludworth, 114 F.4th 1038, 1045 (9th Cir. 2024) (cleaned up). But “as long as a petition has any potential merit, it is not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.