From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamilton v. Acosta

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Jun 2, 2020
Civil Action No. 20-21318-Civ-Scola (S.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2020)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 20-21318-Civ-Scola

06-02-2020

Paul Hamilton, Petitioner, v. Juan Acosta, Respondent.


Order Adopting Magistrate Judge's Report And Recommendation

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, consistent with Administrative Order 2019-02 of this Court, for a ruling on all pre-trial, nondispositive matters and for a report and recommendation on any dispositive matters. On May 8, 2020, Judge Reid issued a report, recommending that the Court deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus and dismiss without prejudice the Petitioner's as-applied due process challenge and Eighth Amendment claim. (Report of Magistrate, ECF No. 13.) The Petitioner did not file objections to the Report, and the time to do so has passed. He filed a supplement to his petition on May 11, 2020, which highlights his medical conditions that he already raised in his Petition. (ECF No. 14.)

The Court will not liberally construe Hamilton's supplement as objections because he could not have received Judge Reid's report by mail and responded by mail in a three-day period. --------

Acosta's supplement argues that his release from prison is warranted due the dangers posed by being detained during the Covid-19 pandemic. Acosta claims that he is at risk of developing a severe case of the virus because of his "high blood pressure, high cholesterol, high thyroid level, depression, [and] post traumatic disorder." (ECF No. 14 at 2.) However, a mandatory detainee would not be eligible for release even if their detainment violated his or her Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights. See Gayle v. Meade, 2020 WL 2086482, at *7 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 30, 2020) (Cooke, J.). In Gayle v. Meade, the Court found that the confinement of detainees with severe medical conditions by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") during the Covid-19 pandemic violated the Petitioners' Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights. Id. at *5. She further determined that the appropriate remedy is for ICE to transfer detainees after evaluating each detainee's eligibility for release pursuant to ICE's Covid-19 Pandemic Response Requirements. Gayle, 2020 WL 2086482 at *1 (S.D. Fla. May 2, 2020) (Cooke, J.). Judge Cooke makes clear that "mandatory detainees," like Hamilton, are not eligible for transfer due to these violations. Gayle, 2020 WL 2086482 at *7. Therefore, due to his mandatory detainee status, he is not eligible for the relief he seeks.

The Court has considered Judge Reid's report, the Petitioner's supplemental filing (ECF No. 14), the record, and the relevant legal authorities. The Court finds Judge Reid's report and recommendation cogent and compelling. The Court affirms and adopts Judge Reid's report and recommendation (ECF No. 13). The Court denies the petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1). The Court does not issue a certificate of appealability. Finally, the Court directs the Clerk to close this case. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on June 2, 2020.

/s/_________

Robert N. Scola, Jr.

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Hamilton v. Acosta

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Jun 2, 2020
Civil Action No. 20-21318-Civ-Scola (S.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2020)
Case details for

Hamilton v. Acosta

Case Details

Full title:Paul Hamilton, Petitioner, v. Juan Acosta, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Date published: Jun 2, 2020

Citations

Civil Action No. 20-21318-Civ-Scola (S.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2020)