SUpreme Court Ruled Crminal Lawer must informe their clients of immigration consequnce

Huge? I don't think so. Your first problem is, you would have to assume that the lawyer knew the person was a alien. Year ago, I read a lot of conviction documents from the courts, many times people would swear that they were not told, but the court documents showed that they were. They (the courts) give you a piece of paper, and you sign it without even reading it. Happens all the time.

Now your main problem, if we assume that your lawyer must warn you. How do you prove he didn't? Next, if the courts rule that you must get the warning, what does that have to do with USCIS. You still have a conviction, and that isn't their fault. This issue has been addressed before, it isn't something new.
 
This is a supreme court ruling!!. If it was addressed b4 , more than likely nothing was done until now. This is not about changing old convictions, its about current LPR's who are taking plea-bargains not knowing immigration consequenses. Now that its a LAW, poeple just wont plea guilty or just sign anything without reading the small print just to get out of jail. Think about all the LPRs who have a language barrier, people who cant afford a real lawyer and get a court appointed lawyer. ALL court appointed lawyers try to just get rid of the case as fast as possible they have way too many cases in their hands. The best way to get rid of the case is talking you into pleading guilty by lowering your charge or whatever.
So what if you may still get convicted of the crime?. If its a serious crime, then you shoud be punished!. What about the ones who commited petty theft, drug possesion minor charges that under immigration EYEs they are deportable charges?????. Finally, this will keep poeple from being misinformed by criminal lawyers who dont know about immigration law.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This reminded me of another case I stumbled upon yesterday, Rashid v. Mukasey in which Rashid was actually deported for two drug convictions but the interesting part is that the government has agreed to let him back AND PAY FOR HIS VISIT so that he can appear in the appeals court to fight his case:

E.

Rashid’s request to be returned to the United States

Finally, Rashid has requested that, if he prevails on appeal, the government be required to
fund his return to the United States so that he can apply for cancellation of removal. But his only
citation in support of this argument is to Califano v. Yamasaki, 442 U.S. 682, 705 (1979), which
addressed the power of federal courts to issue injunctions. He also makes a general plea under the
broad scope of equitable relief generally available to courts in order to “fully accomplish justice.”

In response, the government indicated in a footnote to its brief that, should we decide that
further administrative proceedings are required (a point it now explicitly argues in favor of), “there
is no basis for assuming that the Government would not return [Rashid] to the United States, if
necessary to conduct those proceedings.” Based on the government’s apparent concession that it
will return Rashid to the United States for the proceedings that we now require, any dispute
regarding this issue can be resolved by the BIA.

III. CONCLUSION

For all of the reasons set forth above, we REVERSE the judgment of the BIA and
REMAND the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...2EIEJC&sig=AHIEtbSz8qAzfsGhHXxDHkbN5VwhmJLUBQ
 
What is the Post-conviction "RELEIEF" though for this? removing the plea means reprosecution right?
 
Once you reprosecute something after the statute of limitations has expired the accused cannot be legally bound by any new "findings" against him since they will have statutory immunity from prosecution. So there is no risk of incarceration or any new convictions whatsoever. The only outcome can be neutral or good such as vacation or aquital. I'm taking a guess here, maybe one of the armchair lawyers can correct me. Most felonies barring murder, tax fraud and money laundering have a 7 year statute of limitations afaik.
 
Do you have a reference for the federal or state procedural law for this? If the case has been dismissed can it still be vacated? if yes, whats the procedure?

praxx said:
Once you reprosecute something after the statute of limitations has expired the accused cannot be legally bound by any new "findings" against him since they will have statutory immunity from prosecution. So there is no risk of incarceration or any new convictions whatsoever. The only outcome can be neutral or good such as vacation or aquital. I'm taking a guess here, maybe one of the armchair lawyers can correct me. Most felonies barring murder, tax fraud and money laundering have a 7 year statute of limitations afaik.
Click to expand...
 
haid420 said:
Do you have a reference for the federal or state procedural law for this? If the case has been dismissed can it still be vacated? if yes, whats the procedure?
Click to expand...

No. All I know is that every single misdemeanor count and felony count that is in state or federal statute either has no statute of limitations or it has a set statute of limitations ranging from 5 to 7 years in most cases. It's only common sense that if 7+ years have passed from the commission of an offence then you cannot bring out any fresh convictions against the accused because well it's statutorily impossible. That's regarding reprosecution, I was only using common sense here.

Vacation of cases I know nothing about. Let one of the other people with hands on knowledge about that answer the questions.
 
If the case was dismissed and I get my record expunged, will that work? I dont think I can get this vacated since the case was dismissed!

praxx said:
No. All I know is that every single misdemeanor count and felony count that is in state or federal statute either has no statute of limitations or it has a set statute of limitations ranging from 5 to 7 years in most cases. It's only common sense that if 7+ years have passed from the commission of an offence then you cannot bring out any fresh convictions against the accused because well it's statutorily impossible. That's regarding reprosecution, I was only using common sense here.

Vacation of cases I know nothing about. Let one of the other people with hands on knowledge about that answer the questions.
Click to expand...
 
haid420 said:
If the case was dismissed and I get my record expunged, will that work? I dont think I can get this vacated since the case was dismissed!
Click to expand...

Well you can't get your arrest record erased though, can you? On the i485 they want to know each and every time you were ever arrested for anything, not just convicted but even plain arrested. So maybe you will just have to hand the court disposition over to satisfy their requirements. I'm not sure if people can get their arrest records deleted. This is really out of my area of knowledge I am learning more about these complexities every day, maybe someone else here has some knowledge that can help you.
 
I think people can get arrested but not convicted. I just requested the Order of Disposition to see if I was convicted or not. You are correct I cannot get the arrest erased as far as immigration goes. People can get wrongfully arrested right (if you think about it)? Mine is a really weird case because the case was dismissed and no charges were filed.

praxx said:
Well you can't get your arrest record erased though, can you? On the i485 they want to know each and every time you were ever arrested for anything, not just convicted but even plain arrested. So maybe you will just have to hand the court disposition over to satisfy their requirements. I'm not sure if people can get their arrest records deleted. This is really out of my area of knowledge I am learning more about these complexities every day, maybe someone else here has some knowledge that can help you.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top