Post Padilla: Padilla’s Puzzles for Review in State and Federal Courts

12 Pages Posted: 11 Nov 2010 Last revised: 20 May 2011

See all articles by Gray Proctor

Gray Proctor

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Nancy J. King

Vanderbilt University - Law School

Date Written: October 28, 2010


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

Keywords: Padilla, deportation, plea, counsel, collateral, habeas, Sixth Amendment, Strickland, ineffective

Suggested Citation

Proctor, Gray and King, Nancy J., Post Padilla: Padilla’s Puzzles for Review in State and Federal Courts (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, Available at SSRN:

Gray Proctor

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ( email )

255 W. Main Street, Suite 230
Charlottesville, VA 22902
United States

Nancy J. King (Contact Author)

Vanderbilt University - Law School ( email )

131 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37203-1181
United States
(615) 343-9836 (Phone)
(615) 322-6631 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics