United States v. Delgado-Ramos
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
Jose Delgado-Ramos appeals his conviction for attempted entry after deportation, see 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)-(b), on the ground that the district court failed to inform him of the immigration consequences of his plea during the plea colloquy. Delgado entered his plea without the benefit of a plea agreement. Because Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), was decided after he was sentenced, Delgado did not raise a Padilla argument to the district court. Therefore, our review is for plain error. See United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 63, 122 S.Ct. 1043, 152…
Also in this document: Concurring in the judgment.
3Cases cited19 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by54 opinions
- People v. PequeNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- Robert Rodriguez v. At&t Mobility Services LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Doug Lair v. Steve BullockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- United States v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
- Michael Murray v. Mayo ClinicCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.