Gomez v. Tennessee, 2011 WL 1797305 (Tenn. Crim. App. May 12, 2011): Padilla announced a new rule and would not be applied retroactively. Petition for post-conviction relief for 1997 conviction denied.
U.S. v. Lin, 2011 WL 197206 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 20, 2011): Padilla did not announce a new rule and therefore applies retroactively to 2007 conviction. Petition for writ of coram nobis granted.
State v. Ikharo, 2011 WL 2201193 (Ohio App. June 7, 2011): Padilla not implicated where court gives required advisal concerning possible immigration consequences of conviction. Motion denied. (this is the same person as Ikharo v. Holder 614 F.3d 622 (6th Cir. 2010) (conviction for gross sexual imposition is an aggravated felony sex abuse of a minor) (see also http://6thcir.blogspot.com/2010/12/ohio-appellate-court-limits-padilla.html for another Ohio case)
Michigan v. Abbas, 2011 WL 2347622 (Mich. App. June 14, 2011): Without addressing the retroactivity of Padilla, the court remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether the defendant's plea was knowing and voluntary where there was a misunderstanding concerning his eligibility for placement in the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act program.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi
ReplyDeleteThis is great blog as for providing information about immigration problems, rules. I like this conviction rule discussed in the topic.Olathe immigration lawyers