Helstrom v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
6:25-cv-03136
W.D. Mo.
Jun 4, 2025
Check Treatment
Docket

MANDY HELSTROM, et. al, Petitioners, vs. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Respondent.

Case No. 6:25-CV-03136-SRB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION

June 4, 2025

ORDER SEVERING AND DISMISSING PETITIONER MARK HELSTROM

Before the Court is the petition filеd by Petitioner Mark Helstrom, on behalf of Mandy Helstrom, (Doc. 1) and Petitioner ‍​‌​​​​​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‍Mark Helstrom‘s response to the Court‘s show cause order (Doc. 4). Petitioner, Mark Helstrom, proceeding pro se, has filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on behalf of his wife, Mandy Helstrom, who currently is confined at the Greene County Jail in Springfield, Missouri. Doc. 1. Petitioner Mark Helstrom alleges Petitioner Mandy Helstrom has been illegally detained by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE“). Id. Thе petition, signed only by Petitioner Mark Helstrom and not by Mandy Helstrom, allеges Petitioner Mandy ‍​‌​​​​​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‍Helstrom has been illegally detained by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE“). Id. For relief, Petitioner requests thе following: (1) an immediate stay of Mandy Helstrom‘s deportation; (2) immediate release from the ICE detention facility; (3) require ICE to produce all relevant case documentation and show cause why Mandy Helstrom‘s detention is lawful; (4) ensure Mandy Helstrom‘s due process rights are upheld and her right to access the courts are upheld and for a fair hearing to present evidence and testimony regarding the matter if so needed. Id. at 4. For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner Mark Helstrom is SEVERED AND DISMISSED and Petitioner Mandy Helstrom shall have until June 10, 2025, to file an amended petition.

Generally, in order bring a habeas corpus petition on behalf of another person, the party purporting to act for an incarcerated person must show (at least) the following two things: (1) “an adequate explanation – such as inaccessibility, mental incompetence, or other ‍​‌​​​​​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‍disability – why thе real party in interest cannot appear on his own behalf to prosecute the action;” and (2) that the party purporting to act for the real party is “truly dedicated to the best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” . The Court ordered Petitioner Mark Helstrom to show cause as to why the Court should appoint him as next friend to file and act on behalf of Pеtitioner Mandy Helstrom. Doc. 2. In response to the show cause order, Petitioner Mark Helstrom states that Mandy Helstrom has complеted the Section 2241 form and is working on mailing that form to the Court. Doc. 4, р. 4. Thus, Petitioner Mark Helstrom fails to provide an adequate explanation as to why Mandy Helstrom cannot prosecute this aсtion on her own behalf.

To the extent the petition alleges Petitioner Mandy Helstrom has granted Mark Helstrom power of attorney, a power of attorney may confer decision-making authоrity under ‍​‌​​​​​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‍state law, but it does not permit the holder to represent the grantor as a lawyer in federal court. On the contrary, partiеs may proceed in federal court only pro se, when acting solely for themselves, or through counsel. 28 U.S.C. § 1654; see also (non-lawyer has no right to represent another entity in federal court); (holding that parent and guardian could not litigate pro se on behalf of his children) (citation omitted); (“[T]he holder of a power оf attorney ‍​‌​​​​​​‌‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‍is not authorized to appear pro se on behalf of the grantor.“); (“attorney-in-fact” for daughter not permitted to litigate pro se on her behalf). As а result, Petitioner Mark Helstrom is without standing to bring this action on Mandy Helstrom‘s behalf and is SEVERED AND DISMISSED. All further court filings must be filed and executed by Petitioner Mandy Helstrоm.

Due to the defective petition alleging an imminent deportаtion, the Court will grant an extension for Petitioner Mandy Helstrom to file an amended Section 2241 petition until June 13, 2025.

For these reasons, Petitioner Mark Helstrom is SEVERED AND DISMISSED, and Petitioner Mandy Helstrom shall have until June 13, 2025, to file an amended Section 2241 petition.

It is so ORDERED.

/s/ Stephen R. Bough

STEPHEN R. BOUGH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: June 4, 2025

Read the detailed case summary