Immigration ยท Primary-source case analysis

Hernandez Avilez: Mandatory Detention Continued Through Judicial Review, but the Due-Process Claim Remained

Decision: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 20-16142, decided September 8, 2022. Document: Published Ninth Circuit opinion.

Hernandez Avilez v. Garland reviewed a habeas order requiring a bond hearing for a lawful permanent resident held for more than a year under section 1226(c) while her petition for review was pending.

The detention began under section 1226(c)

After completing a state sentence for assault with a firearm, Hernandez Avilez entered ICE custody and removal proceedings. The parties agreed that her conviction initially placed her in mandatory detention without a statutory bond hearing.

The district court applied Casas-Castrillon

Once her case reached the court of appeals, the district court treated the detention authority as shifting from section 1226(c) to section 1226(a), which would permit a bond hearing, and granted habeas relief on that statutory theory.

Jennings displaced the detention-shifting framework

The Ninth Circuit concluded that Jennings v. Rodriguez made clear that sections 1226(a) and 1226(c) govern distinct categories rather than successive procedural stages. It therefore held the relevant portion of Casas-Castrillon clearly irreconcilable with intervening Supreme Court reasoning.

The constitutional question returned to the district court

The panel held that section 1226(c) authority continued through judicial review under then-controlling circuit law, vacated the statutory habeas ruling, and remanded because the district court had not decided the alternative due-process challenge to prolonged detention.

Key takeaways

Discuss the procedural record

Mission X Trial Lawyers represents clients in California. Call (949) 343-9735 or email office@mcxlegal.com.