Kovacs v. U.S., 744 F.3d 44, 51 (2d Cir. Mar. 3, 2014) (The Government observes that these statements [recognizing affirmative misadvice regarding plea as ineffective assistance of counsel] were dicta, not holdings; but if there had been holdings, there would be no occasion now to consider retroactivity. Couto did nothing more than apply the age-old principle that a lawyer may not affirmatively mislead a client. Chaidez, 133 S.Ct. at 1119 (Sotomayor, J., dissenting). At the time Kovacs' conviction became final, no reasonable jurist could find a defense counsel's affirmative misadvice as to the immigration consequences of a guilty plea to be objectively reasonable.).

Note: The courts quotation from Sotomayors dissent in Chaidez is very powerful, referring to affirmative misadvice as an age-old principle. This can be used to argue that Padilla is in effect retroactive as to affirmative misadvice claims to all convictions, whenever they became final.