State v. Favela, 311 P.3d 1213 (Aug. 8, 2013) (an equivocal warning by the trial court of potential immigration consequences of plea is insufficient to cure counsels deficient representation in failing to advise defendant of the actual consequences and is never, by itself, sufficient to cure the prejudice that results from ineffective assistance of counsel in that regard).

The court reasoned:

According to our Supreme Court, advice that a defendant could or might be deported is also inadequate, as such advice is incomplete and therefore inaccurate because [s]tating that a person may be subject to deportation implies there is some chance, potentially a good chance, that the person will not be deported. Id. 15 (quoting Gonzalez v. State, 191 Or.App. 587, 83 P.3d 921, 925 (2004)). This Court has since interpreted Paradez as requiring a definite prediction as to the likelihood of deportation based on the crimes to which a defendant intends to plead and the crimes listed in federal law for which a defendant can be deported. Carlos, 2006"NMCA"141, 14, 140 N.M. 688, 147 P.3d 897.