Daramola v. State
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.
*457Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief wherein he alleged ineffective and inadequate assistance of counsel in providing advice as to the immigration consequences of entering a guilty plea to one count of first-degree online sexual corruption of a child, ORS 163.433. Petitioner contends that, under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as interpreted by Padilla v. Kentucky , 559 U.S. 356, 364, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), his criminal defense counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to inform petitioner, clearly…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Madrigal-Estrella v. State of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- Rojo-Garfias v. State of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. VICTOR ALVAREZ (18-03-0172, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2022
- State v. OdhunoCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2020
- Stephenson v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2023