Text
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL
REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS
OR ANY OTHER COURT, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THIS
OR ANY OTHER COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A
RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
OR RES JUDICATA.
At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, at Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the
2nd day of June, two thousand and six.
PRESENT:
HON. ROGER J. MINER,
HON . GUIDO CALABRESI,
Circuit Judges,
HON . JANE A. RESTANI,*
Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Int'l Trade.
JEAN CARSON VOLGLY REMY,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v. No. 05-0602-pr
BRUCE CHADBOURNE, Interim Field Office Director for
New England District, Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, ALBERTO GONZALEZ, United States Attorney
General, and DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY, MICHAEL
GARCIA, Assistant Secretary, ICE
Defendants-Appellees.
For Petitioner-Appellant: Jean Carson V. Remy, Oakdale, Louisiana For Defendants-Appellees: Douglas P. Morabito, Assistant United States Attorney (William J. Nardini, Assistant United States Attorney, on the brief) for Kevin J. O'Connor, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, New Haven, Connecticut Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Warren W. Eginton, J.).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the District Court's decision is VACATED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as moot.
In June 2003, an Immigration Judge ("IJ") ordered Petitioner-Appellant Jean Carson Volgly Remy ("Remy"), a native and citizen of Haiti, deported because of his status as an aggravated felon.
The Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") affirmed the IJ's decision in December 2003. Remy subsequently filed a petition for habeas relief challenging, inter alia, his detention and the BIA's removal order. In December 2004, the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Eginton, J.) dismissed Remy's habeas petition on jurisdictional grounds. Remy then appealed the District Court's order to us. We assume the parties' familiarity with the facts, procedural history, and scope of issues on appeal, which we reference only as necessary to explain our decision.
All this time, pending his deportation, Remy was detained by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). During this period, a panel of this Court solicited from the government an update indicating whether Remy had, in fact, been deported -- or, whether he remained in detention.
The government acknowledged that Remy had not yet been deported. The case was subsequently scheduled for argument in mid-June 2006.
Prior to argument, however, on May 3, 2006, the ICE released Remy from custody. As a consequence, both Remy and the government moved to dismiss as moot Remy's appeal from the District Court's earlier dismissal of his habeas petition. In addition, Remy asked that we vacate the District Court's decision as moot.
We agree with the parties that, because Remy is no longer in custody, the instant appeal should be dismissed as moot. See Riley v. INS, 310 F.3d 1253, 1257 (10th Cir. 2002).
We also conclude that the District Court's decision should be vacated. We have previously said that, "[i]n general, where the appellee has caused the case to become moot, we vacate the district court's judgment to prevent appellee from insulating a favorable decision from appellate review." Russman v. Bd. of Educ. of the Enlarged Sch. Dist. of the City of Watervliet, 260 F.3d 114, 122 (2d Cir. 2001); see also Doe v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 1409351, at *2 (2d Cir. May 23, 2006).
Because it was the government's decision to release Remy from custody that mooted the appeal, vacatur of the District Court's judgment is proper. See Soliman v. United States, 296 F.3d 1237, 1243 (11th Cir. 2002) ("[W]hen a case becomes moot on appeal, the Court of Appeals must not only dismiss the case, but also vacate the district court's order. This practice clears the path for future relitigation of the issues between the parties and eliminates a judgment, review of which was prevented through happenstance." (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)).
For the foregoing reasons, we DISMISS Remy's appeal as moot, and we VACATE the District Court's decision.
For the Court, ROSEANN B. MACKECHNIE, Clerk of the Court by:
* The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Chief Judge of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit - Colleen Russman, a Child With Disabilities, By Her Parents, Patricia and Paul Russman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the Board of Education of the Enlarged City School District of the City of Watervliet, Defendant-Appellee., 260 F.3d 114 (2nd Cir. 2001)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit - Nabil Soliman, Petitioner-Appellant, v. United States of America, on Behalf of Ins, Respondent-Appellee., 296 F.3d 1237 (11th Cir. 2002)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit - Jeremy E. Riley, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, the District Director, District 19, Respondent-Appellee. Jeremy E. Riley, Petitioner, v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Respondent., 310 F.3d 1253 (10th Cir. 2002)
See other documents that cite the same legislation