Office of Immigration Litigation publishes Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions in response to Supreme Court decision in Padilla vs. Kentucky.

I disagree with some of their analysis on exceptions and waivers including the one for drug possession crimes and crimes of violence aggravated felonies, to name a few. Nonetheless, it is very instructive for the non-immigration litigator.

"In view of the Supreme Court's decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), the Office of Immigration Litigation ("OIL") has prepared a comprehensive overview of the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act that are relevant to criminal aliens. The overview is intended to assist interested parties in understanding the potential immigration consequences of a plea to criminal charges. Padilla held that the Sixth Amendment requires defense counsel to advise a noncitizen client of the risk of deportation arising from a guilty plea. The Court concluded that defense counsel's failure to so advise, or defense counsel's misadvice regarding the immigration consequences of the plea, may constitute ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), which may be a basis for withdrawing a guilty plea and vacating a conviction.

The Court's holding in Padilla requires defense counsel to have a basic understanding of immigration law - an area in which they "may not be well versed" - in order to effectively advise their clients. Padilla, 130 S. Ct. at 1483. The decision is also of obvious importance, however, to federal and state prosecutors and judges, among other interested parties. This guide - to which many OIL attorneys have contributed - presents a brief, cogent, and clear introduction that identifies and summarizes the relevant statutes."

Ricky Malik, Esq.

Attorney At Law