Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> TalkLeft
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal Commentary
: TalkLeftSupreme Court: Overturns Gulty Plea for Failing to Warn of Deportation Consequences
By Jeralyn
The Supreme Court took a big step forward today and ruled that defense counsel must advise clients of adverse immigration consequences to their guilty pleas. The case is Padilla v. Kentucky, the opinion is here. Even Roberts and Alito concurred (Scalia and Thomas dissented.) The holding:
The lawyer for an alien charged with crime has a constitutional obligation to tell the client that a guilty plea carries a risk that he will be deported. The Court, however, does not decide whether the individual in this specific case has been prejudiced by the lawyer’s failure to give that advice.
[More...]
From the syllabus:
The weight of prevailing professional norms supports the view that counsel must advise her client regarding the deportation risk. And this Court has recognized the importance to the client of “ ‘[p]reserving the . . . right to remain in the United States’ ”and “preserving the possibility of” discretionary relief from deportation. INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U. S. 289, 323.
Thus, this is not a hard case in which to find deficiency: The consequences of Padilla’s plea could easily be determined from reading the removal statute, his deportation was presumptively mandatory, and his counsel’s advice was incorrect.
There will, however, undoubtedly be numerous situations in which the deportation consequences of a plea are unclear. In those cases, a criminal defense attorney need do no more than advise a noncitizen client that pending criminal charges may carry adverse immigration consequences. But when the deportation consequence is truly clear, as it was here, the duty to give correct advice is equally clear. Accepting Padilla’s allegations as true, he has sufficiently alleged constitutional deficiency to satisfy Strickland’s first prong. Whether he can satisfy the second prong, prejudice, is left for the Kentucky courts to consider in the first instance.
Full post as published by TalkLeft on March 31, 2010 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Pressure Cooker
Home Shopping Network pays $875,000 civil settlement for failing to warn customers about the dangerous product.
Australia
Reported $4.5 million settlement for wrongful deportation.
Georgette Klinger Spa
alleging unpaid wages and benefits and violation of the WARN Act.
Hardcore Energy Drinks
FDA, Health Canada Warn of Suspected Tampering
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation

"Mack appeal of gulty plea to be heard by high court"
"Supreme Court denies Demjanjuk's deportation plea"
Immigration Law and Vacating a Plea
Advice Re: Immigration Consequences is a Constitutional Right
Failure to advise of possible deportation not IAC where court advised of it








