Legal Opinion

State of Washington v. Jose Antonio Manajares

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided February 2, 2017No. 31271-2-IIIPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSiddoway, J.

¶1 In Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 367, 130 S. Ct. 1473, 176 L. Ed. 2d 284 (2010), the United States Supreme Court held that constitutionally competent counsel must advise a client facing criminal charges about the risk of deportation. In In re Personal Restraint of Yung-Cheng Tsai, our Supreme Court held that while Padilla created a “new rule” under federal law for retroac-tivity purposes, Washington has long required by statute that criminal defendants be advised of immigration consequences of a guilty plea, so Padilla simply applied a Washington lawyer’s duty to a specific concern.…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  3. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  5. Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Personal Restraint Petition Of Ronald SorensonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  2. State of Washington v. Daniel Herbert DunbarCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  3. State of Washington v. Juan Manuel Flores-ArroyoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API