Criminal Defense of Immigrants

Chapter

§11.1 I. Introduction
§11.2 II. Summary: What Criminal Counsel Need to Know
§11.3 III. Effective Orders Vacating Conviction
§11.4 A. General Rule
§11.5 B. Full Faith and Credit
§11.6 C. Burden of Proof
§11.7 D. Increasing the Chances Immigration Authorities Will Respect the Order
§11.8 E. Jurisdiction to Vacate
§11.9 IV. Effective Orders Modifying Sentence
§11.10 A. Most Recent Sentence Governs
§11.11 B. New Definition of "Conviction"
§11.12 C. Reducing Sentence
§11.13 D. Reduction of Felony to Misdemeanor
§11.14 1. Immigration Consequences
§11.15 2. Procedure
§11.16 E. Reduction of Misdemeanor to Infraction
§11.17 V. Effective Rehabilitative Relief
§11.18 A. General Rule
§11.19 B. Federal First Offender Act Exception
§11.20 C. Ninth Circuit Exception for State and Foreign Rehabilitative Relief Analogous to FFOA
§11.21 D. Judicial Recommendation Against Deportation
§11.22 E. Pardon
§11.23 1. Determination of Whether a Pardon Exists
§11.24 2. Foreign Pardons
§11.25 VI. Procedure to Obtain Post-Conviction Relief
§11.26 A. Finding Post-Conviction Counsel
§11.27 B. Investigating the Case
§11.28 C. Developing a Strategy
§11.29 1. Adverse Consequences of Post-Conviction Relief
§11.30 2. Ex Post Facto Doctrine
§11.31 3. Conduct-Based Immigration Consequences
§11.32 D. Evaluating the Case
§11.33 1. Requirements for Successful Post-Conviction Relief
§11.34 a. Matching the Vehicle to the Immigration Effect
§11.35 b. Matching the Vehicle to the Ground of Legal Invalidity
§11.36 c. Choosing a Vehicle that Works
§11.37 d. Timing of Post-Conviction Relief
§11.38 2. Factors to Consider
§11.39 a. The Current Status of the Client
§11.40 i. The Client is Clean and Sober
§11.41 ii. The Client Has Strong Equities
§11.42 iii. The Client is Out of Custody
§11.43 iv. The Client Has No Outstanding or Potential Arrest Warrants
§11.44 v. The Client Has No Current Aggravated Re-entry Exposure
§11.45 vi. The Client is Lawfully Present
§11.46 b. The Criminal Situation
§11.47 i. A Small Criminal Case Has Large Immigration Effects
§11.48 ii. The Client Has Few Convictions
§11.49 iii. Number and Diversity of Original Charges
§11.50 iv. The Evidence of Guilt is Weak, or the Client Has a Plausible Claim of (at Least Partial) Innocence
§11.51 v. The Client Was Charged Jointly With 1 or More Codefendants
§11.52 vi. A Relatively Minor Change in Conviction or Sentence Will Solve the Immigration Problem
§11.53 vii. There is Small Risk the Client Will Receive Additional Time in Custody
§11.54 (a. Adverse Criminal Consequences
§11.55 (b. Adverse Immigration Consequences
§11.56 viii. The Jurisdiction Where the Conviction Occurred is Relatively Sympathetic
§11.57 ix. Incomplete Initial Defense Investigation
§11.58 x. Technical Problems with Prosecution Case
§11.59 c. Timing of the Case
§11.60 i. Federal Time Limits
§11.61 (a. Motion to Vacate Sentence Under § 2255
§11.62 (b. Coram Nobis Time Limits
§11.63 (c. Attacking State Convictions
§11.64 ii. Time Limits Within Which Actions for State Post-Conviction Relief Must be Filed
§11.65 d. The Client Has 6 Months or More Before Irrevocable Immigration Damage Occurs
§11.66 e. There is Still Time To Reopen the Immigration Case if Criminal Convictions Are Eliminated
§11.67 f. The Records Necessary to Establish Error in the Criminal Case Still Exist
§11.68 VII. Vacating Convictions
§11.69 A. Vehicles
§11.70 B. Grounds
§11.71 VIII. Modifying Sentences
§11.72 A. Vehicles
§11.73 B. Grounds
§11.74 IX. After Obtaining Post-Conviction Relief
§11.75 A. Defending the Criminal Case Again
§11.76 1. Some Safer Alternative Dispositions
§11.77 2. Plea Negotiations
§11.78 B. Documenting the Victory
§11.79 1. Obtaining Certified Copies
§11.80 2. Correcting Criminal History Records
§11.81 C. Reopening Removal Proceedings
§11.82 1. Before Deportation Has Occurred
§11.83 2. After Deportation Has Occurred
§11.84 3. Collateral Attack of Deportation Order Upon Prosecution for Illegal Re-entry
§11.85 X. Other Resources

§ 11.77 (B)

For more text, click "Next Page>"

(B) Right Against Vindictive Reprosecution. While the black letter law states that the client cannot be punished for exercising the right to vacate the conviction, this protection has become riddled with exceptions. For example, there is no presumption of vindictive prosecution where a greater sentence is imposed after trial than was originally imposed after a guilty plea.[455] If the original sentence was a legally “unauthorized” one (either too great or too small), and the client attacks the conviction, the improper sentence may be set aside at any time the error is brought to the notice of the court, and there is no bar to imposition of a greater proper sentence.[456] Reversal of a conviction on a greater offense, coupled with a final conviction on a lesser included offense, does not preclude retrial of the greater offense when the offenses were charged in the same indictment and tried together in the same original trial.[457]

Nonetheless, the basic principle that due process forbids punishing a defendant for the exercise of a constitutional right has continuing vitality today.[458] Therefore, due process forbids imposing a harsher punishment on the defendant in retaliation for his action in obtaining post-conviction relief to vindicate a constitutional right.

[455] Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S. 794 (1989) (Pearce presumption of vindictiveness does not apply when greater sentence is imposed after trial than was imposed after prior guilty plea).

[456] United States v. Edmonson, 792 F.2d 1492, 1496 (9th Cir. 1986); People v. Serrato, 9 Cal.3d 753, 764 (1973).

[457] United States v. Jose, 425 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. Oct. 19, 2005).

[458] People v. Collins, 26 Cal.4th 297 (2001) (holding the waiver of a jury trial obtained by a trial court’s assurance of an unspecified benefit is not a valid waiver under due process).