US Supreme Court Decision Results in Deportation For Many
- April 21, 2013
- No comments
The United States Supreme Court, in Chaidez v. U.S., rendered a decision that changed the fate of immigrants and lawful permanent residents throughout the nation who are awaiting deportation as a result of taking guilty pleas for certain crimes. The claim of Chaidez was based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Chaidez was a Mexican immigrant who was a lawful permanent resident for 20 years before pleading guilty to an aggravated felony. Chaidez’ case took place in 2004 and in 2009 immigration sought to deport her. She filed a writ of coram nobis in federal court seeking to overturn her conviction, 5 years later, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Her claim was the her attorney failed to advise her that a guilty plea to felony mail fraud would result in deportation. At the same time, the US Supreme Court decided Padilla v. Kentucky which held that defense attorneys are required to inform non-citizen clients of the immigration consequences of certain guilty pleas. The US Supreme Court, in Chaidez, rendered a holding that Padilla v. Kentucky created a “new rule” under the standards of Teague v. Lane and, as a new rule, Padilla does not reply retroactively to convictions prior to 2010. If you have been charged with a crime and are not a citizen, you should immediately seek counsel to advise you of the nature of the charges, the possible outcomes of your matter and whether deportation may occur. For more information on criminal charge in New Jersey superior or municipal courts visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. .