12 N.E.3d 694
Mass. App. Ct.2014Background
- Defendant Jose Martinez pleaded guilty in 1999 to distribution of a class B substance and conspiracy, under a plea with an immigration warning.
- Plea judge stated the defendant could be deported and the consequences were up to federal authorities, not the state court.
- Defendant was deported in October 1999 following the plea and sentence.
- In 2011, Martinez filed a motion for a new trial claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, supported by his affidavit and others' affidavits claiming misrepresentation about deportation.
- The motion included two affidavits from the defendant and his child's mother; a third affidavit from an immigration attorney was also submitted.
- The motion judge denied without a hearing, citing absence of plea counsel affidavit and deeming other affidavits hearsay or not helpful; the defendant sought reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an evidentiary hearing was required | Martinez argues substantial factual issues require live testimony. | Commonwealth contends no substantial issue without plea counsel affidavit. | Remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the ineffective assistance claim. |
| Prejudice showing in plea-based ineffective assistance | Without proper advice on deportation, plea was involuntary; prejudice shown could exist. | Prejudice must be shown; lack of plea counsel affidavit precludes summary resolution. | Prejudice to be assessed at the remand hearing; some likelihood defendant would have gone to trial. |
| Adequacy of Padilla-based standard for permanent residents | Counsel must inform that deportation was a likely consequence of the plea. | Immigration warnings at sentencing suffice. | Counsel's failure to convey deportation consequences is potentially prejudicial under Padilla. |
| Reliance on absence of plea counsel affidavit | Defendant should not be barred by lack of plea counsel affidavit when other affidavits support claim. | Absence of plea counsel affidavit undermines credibility and weighs against relief. | Court rejects automatic reliance on absence; remand for live credibility determinations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (U.S. 2010) (counsel must inform client of deportation consequences of guilty plea)
- Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 468 Mass. 174 (Mass. 2014) (reasserts deportation consequences and Padilla framework)
- Commonwealth v. Clarke, 460 Mass. 30 (Mass. 2011) (prejudice and presentation of counsel's deficient performance in guilty plea)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (standard for prejudice in guilty plea context)
- Commonwealth v. Rodriguez, 467 Mass. 1002 (Mass. 2014) (procedural framework for motion to withdraw guilty plea and new trial)
- Commonwealth v. Grace, 397 Mass. 303 (Mass. 1986) (interpretation of adequacy of substantial issues for hearing)
- Commonwealth v. Chatman, 466 Mass. 327 (Mass. 2013) (test for when to hold evidentiary hearings on ineffective assistance)