Ramirez v. State
New Mexico Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHÁVEZ, Justice.
{1} In State v. Paredez, 2004-NMSC-036, ¶ 19, 136 N.M. 533, 101 P.3d 799, we held that a criminal defense attorney who represents a noncitizen client “must advise that client of the specific immigration consequences of pleading guilty” to pending charges. An attorney’s failure to do so will be ineffective assistance of counsel if the client is prejudiced. Id. Ramirez pleaded guilty in 1997 and now asserts that his attorney did not advise him about any immigration consequences of his pleas. The question in this case is whether our holding in Paredez applies retroactively…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Lockhart v. FretwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Dominguez v. StateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. TrammellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
- State v. GutierrezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2016
- State v. TejeiroNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014
- State v. OteroNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2020
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.