Campos v. State
2012 Minn. LEXIS 245
| Minn. | 2012Background
- This case asks whether Padilla v. Kentucky's deportation-warning rule applies retroactively to collateral review of a conviction.
- Reyes Campos pleaded guilty to simple robbery as an adult after juvenile certification; he was 18 and a lawful permanent resident, not a citizen.
- The plea occurred July 10, 2009; defense counsel did not inform him of immigration consequences, and the plea was not accompanied by a Rule 15.01 immigration advisory on the record.
- Castle: the district court sentenced Reyes Campos to probation and 365 days in a county workhouse, yielding an aggravated felony under the INA due to immigration consequences.
- Reyes Campos was detained by ICE in January 2010 and later deported to Nicaragua.
- Reyes Campos later moved to withdraw his plea relying on Padilla, arguing retroactive application and ineffective assistance of counsel; the district court denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Padilla announce a retroactive rule on collateral review? | Campos contends Padilla is retroactive and applies to his case. | State argues Padilla is a new procedural rule not retroactive under Teague. | Padilla announces a new rule; not retroactive on collateral review. |
| Does Padilla's retroactivity lead to withdrawal of the guilty plea under Strickland? | Padilla renders counsel ineffective for not warning about deportation, making plea invald. | Because Padilla is not retroactive, no retroactive Strickland failure exists. | Retroactivity not available; no withdrawal under Teague. |
| If Padilla is not retroactive, can Rule 15.01 immigration advisory failure justify withdrawal? | Lack of Rule 15.01 advisory plus counsel failure constitutes manifest injustice. | Rule 15.01 advisory issue is collateral and not resolved on direct appeal; retroactivity not at issue. | Remand to determine withdrawal rights based on Rule 15.01 |
Key Cases Cited
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (U.S. 2010) (deportation considerations within Sixth Amendment counsel duty)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-part standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (U.S. 1989) (retroactivity framework for new constitutional rules)
- Orocio, 645 F.3d 630 (3d Cir. 2011) (Padilla retroactivity in the Third Circuit)
- Chaidez v. United States, 655 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011) (Padilla announced a new rule; circuits divided on retroactivity)
- Graham v. Collins, 506 U.S. 461 (U.S. 1993) (test for whether a rule is new under Teague depends on the legal landscape)