WALVER DANIEL VILORIO MONCADA
v.
WARDEN, GLADES COUNTY DETENTION CENTER AND U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL

M.D. Fla. | 2026-01-12
No. 2:26-cv-00006
2025 WL 3713982 2026 FFL 900 District Court, M.D. Florida (2026) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Walver Daniel Vilorio Moncada, an immigration detainee, filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging his detention at Glades County Detention Center on Fifth Amendment Due Process grounds, claiming he was denied a bond hearing. The court dismissed the petition without prejudice for failure to plead sufficient facts to support habeas relief.


Holding

The court held that Moncada is not entitled to habeas relief because his petition contains insufficient factual allegations to support his claims. Conclusory allegations are inadequate to warrant habeas relief, and the attached exhibits do not cure the deficient pleading.


Headnotes

[1] A federal court may dismiss a petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice if the petitioner fails to provide sufficient factual detail to support their claims.

[2] Conclusory allegations alone are insufficient to warrant habeas relief.

Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“Moncada claims his detention violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because he has not received a bond hearing.”

States the core constitutional claim raised in the habeas petition

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

ICE arrested Moncada on November 21, 2025, and he is currently detained at Glades County Detention Center. Moncada claims his detention violates the F…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

Before the Court is Walver Daniel Vilorio Moncada's pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1). Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested Moncada on November 21, 2025, and he is currently detained at Glades County Detention Center. Moncada claims his detention violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because he has not received a bond hearing. The Court reviews the petition under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 cases [fn 1].

Courts in this district and around the country have found recent changes to ICE policies on bond hearings unlawful as applied in certain situations. See, e.g., Bautista v. Santacruz, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, 2025 WL 3713982 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025). But Moncada does not provide enough detail for the Court to determine whether ICE violated his rights. The petition does not include potentially important facts, like when and how he entered the country, his current immigration status, the status of any removal proceedings, and the circumstances of his arrest. Conclusory allegation are not enough to warrant habeas relief. See Chavez v. Secʼy, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 647 F. 3d 1057, 1061 (11th Cir. 2011). The exhibits attached to Moncada's petition—nearly 800 pages of entirely irrelevant documents—do not cure the deficient pleading.

Moncada is not entitled to habeas relief on any ground in his petition. Accordingly, the petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. Moncada may file an amended petition within 21 days of this order. Otherwise, the Court will enter judgment and close this case without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on January 12, 2026.

Sheri Polster Rappell SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SA: FTMP-1

[fn 1]: Courts may apply the rules to habeas actions brought under § 2241. See Section 2254 Rule 1(b).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …und recent changes to ICE policies on bond hearings unlawful as applied in certain situations. See, 1 Courts may apply the rules to habeas actions brought under § 2241. See Section 2254 Rule 1(b). e.g., Bautista v. Santacruz, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, 2025 WL 3713982 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025). But Moncada does not provide enough detail for the Court to determine whether ICE violated his rights. The petition does not include potentially important facts, like when and how he entered th…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw