|
||||
|
||||
Post Padilla: Padilla’s Puzzles for Review in State and Federal CourtsGray ProctorFourth Circuit Court of Appeals Nancy J. KingVanderbilt University - Law School October 28, 2010 Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 23, No. 3, February 2011 Vanderbilt Law and Economics Research Paper No. 11-01 Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 11-01 Abstract: This article addresses questions that may face courts as defendants seek relief under the Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, which held that counsel’s failure to adequately inform the defendant of the deportation consequences of conviction constituted deficient performance under the Sixth Amendment. Issues addressed include: express waivers of review in plea agreements; what constitutes deficient advice and prejudice sufficient for a finding of ineffective assistance; the retroactive application of Padilla to cases on post-conviction review; federal habeas review of state court decisions rejecting Padilla-type claims; procedural default, successive petition, and time bars to federal habeas review of Padilla claims; and other collateral relief. This draft includes citations to emerging case authority available as of December 7, 201'3
Number of Pages in PDF File: 12 Keywords: Padilla, deportation, plea, counsel, collateral, habeas, Sixth Amendment, Strickland, ineffective Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: November 11, 2010 ; Last revised: May 20, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.484 seconds