Commonwealth v. Pridham
394 S.W.3d 867
| Ky. | 2012Background
- Defendants pled guilty to offenses under Kentucky statutes; Pridham faced violent-offender parole ineligibility (85% rule) and claimed counsel misadvised him about parole, leading to a 30-year plea; Cox pled guilty to sex-offense charges and was advised he would be parole-eligible after about 2 years, but completion of sex-offender treatment could delay parole; Padilla v. Kentucky prompted reconsideration of collateral consequences as to deportation; Kentucky Court of Appeals remanded Pridham for an evidentiary hearing and Cox’s claim was affirmed in part and denied in part; Supreme Court of Kentucky held Padilla extends to certain collateral consequences entailing serious penalties tied to the plea; the trial court’s handling and standard of review for ineffective assistance claims were discussed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Padilla extend to collateral consequences like parole ineligibility under Kentucky law? | Pridham: misadvice on parole consequences triggers Strickland. | Commonwealth: Padilla applies only to deportation; collateral consequences rule remains. | Yes, Padilla extends to parole consequences in Kentucky. |
| Did Pridham state a valid Strickland claim requiring an evidentiary hearing? | Pridham: misadvice likely affected plea decision; prejudice shown. | Commonwealth: no prejudice shown; credibility to be resolved at hearing. | Pridham stated a prima facie Strickland claim; remanded for an evidentiary hearing. |
| Did Cox’s plea warrant relief under Padilla or remain outside its reach? | Cox: misadvice about parole consequences should trigger Padilla relief. | Cox: sex-offender treatment effects on parole are punitive like Padilla’s deportation. | No relief under Padilla; parole consequences here not sufficiently like deportation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (prejudice standard in guilty-plea context)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (deportation consequences may be direct or sufficiently punitive to require notice)
- Premo v. Moore, 131 S. Ct. 733 (2011) (reevaluates prejudice standard in guilty-plea contexts)
- Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (2011) (deficiency standard under Strickland; prevailing norms inquiry)
- Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970) (voluntariness of guilty plea and direct consequences standard)
- Fraser v. Commonwealth, 59 S.W.3d 448 (Ky.2001) (plea challenges and evidentiary hearing standards in Kentucky)