Criminal Defense of Immigrants



 
 

§ 11.75 (A)

 
Skip to § 11.

For more text, click "Next Page>"

(A)  In General.  Sometimes, the new disposition of the criminal case will have been negotiated prior to the issuance of the court order vacating the former conviction or sentence.  In other cases, the prosecution may have been intransigent, and the court granted vacatur over the objections of the prosecution.  In any event, the order vacating conviction or sentence only invalidated a particular portion of the proceedings, but did not dismiss the original charges.  Normally, all original charges are automatically reinstated.[440]

 

                It is now necessary to defend the client against the original charges a second time and either: (a) obtain an order dismissing the charges, either with or without the consent of the prosecution; (b) enter a new plea bargain and obtain a new sentence; or (c) take the case to trial.


[440] Compare United States v. Sandoval-Lopez, 122 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 1997) (dismissed counts are not reinstated since defendant did not breach plea agreement), with United States v. Buner, 134 F.3d 1000 (10th Cir. 1998) (No. 97-5066) (dismissed counts are reinstated); United States v. Barron, 127 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 1997), amended to add dissenting opinion, 136 F.3d 675 (9th Cir. 1998). See also United States v. Hillary, 106 F.3d 1170, 1172 (4th Cir. 1997) (“on correcting the error complained of in a section 2255 petition, the defendant may be placed in exactly the same position in which he would have been had there been no error in the first instance.”), quoting United States v. Silvers, 90 F.3d 95, 99 (4th Cir. 1996); United States v. Jose, 425 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 1664  (Feb. 27, 2006).

Updates

 

Ninth Circuit

POST-CON " VACATUR AFTER DEPORTATION
United States v. Barrios-Siguenza, 747 F.3d 1222, 1223 (9th Cir. Apr. 9, 2014) (We were assured at oral argument that Barrios will return for trial should the government choose to retry him and parole him into the country for that purpose. Cf. United States v. Leal"Del Carmen, 697 F.3d 964, 975 (9th Cir. 2012) (discussing the Attorney General's authority to parole aliens into the country to testify in criminal prosecutions (citing 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)(A))). Given the government's authority to permit Barrios to return for retrial, and counsel's assurances that Barrios would be willing to do so, this case is unlikely to languish for an indefinite period before the district court, should the government choose to retry Barrios.).

 

TRANSLATE