Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW

Legal

  •  
  •  

Gavel 001 No Credit stockexpert image

Man facing deportation wins hearing 16 years after guilty plea

10/2/2012 COMMENTS (0)

By Joseph Ax

NEW YORK, Oct 2 (Reuters) - A landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring defense attorneys to advise clients of the potential adverse immigration consequences of a guilty plea applies retroactively, a New York appeals court ruled Tuesday.

Roman Baret faced deportation after pleading guilty in 1996 to criminal sale of a controlled substance. He argued his plea should be vacated under the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, where the court ruled a lawyer's failure to tell a client about the deportation consequences of a guilty plea was ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Appellate Division, First Department, held that Padilla should be applied to cases dating back to at least 1996. The court remanded Baret's case to the trial court to hold a hearing.

The decision appears to be the first time the court has held that Padilla should apply retroactively, according to Labe Richman, who represented Baret on appeal. The Appellate Division, Third Department, also has found that Padilla should apply retroactively, he said, as has the Appellate Term, Second Department.

"To determine whether a rule is to be applied retroactively, the court must determine whether the rule is 'new' or 'old," the First Department wrote in Tuesday's unsigned opinion. "When a Supreme Court decision applies a well-established constitutional principle to a new circumstance, it is considered to be an application of an 'old' rule, and is always retroactive."

The court emphasized that it was not addressing whether Padilla applied to cases before 1996, when major changes to federal immigration law vastly increased the risk that a criminal conviction could lead to deportation for immigrants.

"It's a big victory," Richman said.

The question of whether Padilla should apply retroactively will be taken up by the Supreme Court this fall in Chaidez v. U.S., after several federal appeals courts issued conflicting decisions on the matter.

Tuesday's decision reversed a ruling from Bronx Acting Supreme Court Justice Raymond Bruce.

The Bronx district attorney's office, which prosecuted the case against Baret and argued the case on appeal, did not respond to a request for comment.

The First Department panel included justices Angela Mazzarelli, David Saxe, Leland DeGrasse, Rosalyn Richter and Sheila Abdus-Salaam.

The case is People v. Baret, Appellate Division, First Department, No. 7963.

For the prosecution: Jason Whitehead of the Bronx district attorney's office.

For Baret: Labe Richman.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook   


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters