Andujar v. Francis
Hilda Cecilia Villegas ex rel. Lisual Armando Guzman Andujar v. LaDeon Francis, in his official capacity as Acting Field Office Director of New York Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Kristi Noem, in her official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; and Pam Bondi, in her official capacity as Attorney General
- Rochon
- 1:25-cv-09199
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hilda Cecilia Villegas ex rel. Lisual Armando Guzman Andujar v. LaDeon Francis, Judge Rochon ordered a search for volunteer counsel in a habeas case.
Lisual Armando Guzman Andujar, whose ability to present his detention petition was found to be limited by his incarceration and the petition’s emergency nature; Hilda Cecilia Villegas, his next friend; and any lawyer who might volunteer to represent him.
What happened
Hilda Cecilia Villegas filed a petition for Lisual Armando Guzman Andujar under a federal law allowing challenges to detention. The petition was filed through Villegas, identified as his next friend, while he was in the Southern District of New York.
The court had issued an order requiring the government to respond, and a hearing was scheduled for November 14, 2025. Guzman Andujar’s reply to the government’s opposition was due November 11, 2025. The court considered whether the case and the petitioner’s circumstances supported seeking volunteer legal representation.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the court clerk to try to find a lawyer willing to represent Guzman Andujar without charge. The judge said his incarceration and the emergency nature of the petition significantly limited his ability to present the case and investigate facts. The court explained that it could request, but not require, a lawyer to volunteer. The order did not decide the petition itself.
The detailed version
- Andujar v. Francis · No. 1:25-cv-09199
- Rochon
- Nov. 5, 2025
Background
Lisual Armando Guzman Andujar filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 through his next friend, Hilda Cecilia Villegas, on November 4, 2025. The opinion states that he was present in the Southern District of New York and incarcerated. The court had issued an order requiring a response, scheduled a hearing for November 14, 2025, and set November 11, 2025, as the deadline for the petitioner’s reply to the government’s opposition.
Counsel-request standard
The court considered factors from Hodge v. Police Officers and Garcia v. USICE, including the apparent strength of the claim, the need for factual investigation, whether credibility issues require legal skill, the party’s ability to present the case, and the complexity of the legal issues. The court found that these factors favored seeking volunteer counsel. It specifically found that Guzman Andujar’s incarceration and the emergency nature of his detention petition significantly limited his ability to present the case and conduct related factual investigation.
Order
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon directed the clerk to attempt to locate a volunteer lawyer to represent Guzman Andujar. The order explains that the court does not have authority to appoint counsel in these circumstances; it may only request that an attorney volunteer. If a lawyer volunteers, that lawyer will contact Guzman Andujar or Villegas directly. The court also ordered that Guzman Andujar inform the court by November 7, 2025, if he had already secured counsel or did not want the court to seek a volunteer. This order addressed representation and did not rule on the substance of the detention petition.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.