§ 5.8 (C)
For more text, click "Next Page>"
(C) Minimizing Other Collateral Consequences. Even though they are considered “collateral,” and the court is not obligated to inform the defendant of them at the time of plea to take a valid plea, competent defense counsel will always attempt to minimize not only the collateral immigration consequences of a conviction but also all other collateral consequences of a conviction that are of importance to the client. As Professor Amsterdam has stated, counsel must in every case research “the possible consequences of a conviction” including:
Lower Courts of First Circuit
POST CON RELIEF " VEHICLES " VERMONT " NATIONAL " CORAM NOBIS MAY OFTEN BE USED WHERE TRADITIONAL STATE POST CONVICTION VEHICLES DO NOT APPLY
State v. Sinclair, 2012 Vt. 47 (2012) (the writ of coram nobis is available to pursue 6th Amendment claims for defendants who cannot file under the state PCR statute; the opinion reviews the state of coram nobis law in other jurisdictions, and declines to follow those that have limited or eliminated the availability of the writ (most notably California in an oft-cited decision, People v. Kim)).
CRIMINAL DEFENSE OF IMMIGRANTS " COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES " RESTORATION OF RIGHTS AND STATUS AFTER CONVICTION
On Dec. 22, 2011, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) announced that the consequences of conviction " specific legal barriers, generalized discrimination, and social stigma " have become more numerous and severe, more public, and more permanent. The legal mechanisms relied on in the past to restore rights and status " pardon, expungement, certificates of good conduct " have atrophied or become ineffective, with the result that a significant percentage of the American public is permanently consigned to second class citizenship. As a result, it has created a Task Force on Restoration of Rights and Status After Conviction. For more information, see http://www.criminaljustice.org/criminaldefense.aspx?id=23270