Legal Opinion
State v. Carlos
New Mexico Court of Appeals
Decided October 3, 2006No. 25,982PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SUTIN, Judge.
{1} Our Supreme Court has held that a criminal defense attorney must advise his or her client “of the specific immigration consequences of pleading guilty[.]” State v. Paredez, 2004-NMSC-036, ¶ 19, 136 N.M. 533, 101 P.3d 799. Defendant appeals the denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing that his plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard enunciated in Paredez. We agree and we reverse for the district court to conduct further proceedings and to determine whether Defendant was prejudiced.
BACKGROUND
{2} Defendant, a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. Ivania Maria Couto, Also Known as Sealed Dft 35Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- State v. ParedezNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
- Patterson v. LeMasterNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2001
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. NealNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- Rubio v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. FavelaNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2013
- State v. EdwardsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- State v. FavelaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2015
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.