Ingrid V. Eagly
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law; University of Oxford - Border Criminologies
April 9, 2013
122 Yale Law Journal 2282 (2013)
UCLA School of Law Research Paper No. 13-10
Criminal Justice, Borders and Citizenship Research Paper No. 2247607
For the past fifty years, immigration law has resisted integration of Gideon v. Wainwright’s legacy of appointed counsel for the poor. Today, however, this resistance has given way to Gideon’s migration. At the level of everyday practice, criminal defense attorneys appointed pursuant to Gideon now advise clients on the immigration consequences of convictions, negotiate “immigration safe” plea bargains, defend clients charged with immigration crimes, and, in some model programs, even represent criminal defendants in immigration court. A formal right to appointed counsel in immigration proceedings has yet to be established, but proposals grounded in the constitution, statutes, and expanded government funding are gaining momentum.
From the perspective of criminal defense, the changing role of Gideon-appointed counsel raises questions about the breadth and depth of immigration assistance that should develop under the defense umbrella. From the perspective of immigration legal services, the potential importation of a Gideon-inspired right to counsel requires consideration of the appropriate scope and design for an immigration defender system. This Essay does not attempt to resolve these challenging questions, but rather provides a framework for further reflection grounded in lessons learned from the criminal system’s implementation of Gideon.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 33
Keywords: Gideon v. Wainwright, Padilla v. Kentucky, civil right to appointed counsel, immigration, public defender
Date posted: April 11, 2013 ; Last revised: September 25, 2015
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 2.485 seconds