Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Sentencing Law and Policy

Criminal Law

: Sentencing Law and Policy

Split New York high court ruling spotlights key post-Padilla issues

By Douglas A. Berman

In an interesting split opinion in NY v Gravino, No. 77 (NY May 11, 2010) (available here), the New York Court of Appeals rejected yesterday claims about the import of a defendant failing to know certain significant "collateral" consequences of a conviction when entering a plea.  In so doing, the Gravino ruling spotlights some critical follow-up questions to the Supreme Court's recent Padilla ruling that an attorney's incompetent advice on immigration consequences of a plea could amount to ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. Here is how the majority opinion in Gravino gets started and a key final passage from the court's holding: We hold that because they are collateral rather than direct consequences of a guilty plea, SORA registration and the terms and conditions of probation are not subjects that a trial court must address at the plea hearing...continue to full post

Full post as published by Sentencing Law and Policy on May 12, 2010 (boomark / email).