Legal Opinion

Saldana-Ramirez v. State

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 13, 2013No. C094946CV; A145980PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, C. J.

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying post-conviction relief. ORS 138.530. He asserts that he was denied effective assistance of counsel due to his criminal defense counsel’s purported default in failing to inform him of specific immigration-related consequences that could result from pleading guilty to felony failure to appear. Chaidez v. United States, No 11-820, 2013 WL 610201 (US Feb 20, 2013), forecloses that claim.1 Accordingly, we affirm.

In reviewing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we are bound by the post-conviction court’s factual findings that are supported by…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Chaidez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
  5. Lyons v. PearceOregon Supreme Court · 1985

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Verduzco v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Watkins v. AckleyOregon Supreme Court · 2022
  3. Berg v. NoothCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  4. Madrigal-Estrella v. State of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  5. Hardegger v. AmsberryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API