Ex Parte Jose Moreno, 382 S.W.3d 523

Moreno, a Mexican citizen and permanent resident since 2002, was indicted in 2007 for possession of cocaine and possession with intent to deliver for 2006 conduct.
In 2008 Moreno pled guilty to possession (with the other charge dismissed) and the court deferred adjudication, placing him on eight years of community supervision.
Moreno did not appeal the judgment; in 2010 federal immigration authorities initiated removal proceedings based on a conviction for possessing cocaine.
Moreno filed a writ of habeas corpus in February 2011 asserting ineffective assistance of counsel regarding immigration consequences of the plea, supported by his affidavit.
The State submitted counsel’s affidavit stating he advised Moreno to consult an immigration attorney and that Moreno declined to do so; counsel also described the plea negotiations and that a more serious charge could have been pursued.
The trial court denied relief, adopting the State’s findings and concluding Moreno failed to prove prejudice under Strickland.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Padilla prejudice standard applied?	Moreno asserts prejudice from deficient immigration advice under Padilla.	Moreno's counsel advised caution and referral; Padilla applies, requiring prejudice proof.	Denied; prejudice not proven; court deferred to credibility findings and the record supporting no reasonable probability of a different outcome.

Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (ineffective assistance standard for guilty pleas)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong deficient performance and prejudice test)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (duty to advise on immigration consequences when clear)
Ex parte Mello, 355 S.W.3d 827 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011) (habeas deference to trial court findings)
Ex parte Karlson, 282 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009) (deference to credibility determinations in habeas review)
Kniatt v. State, 206 S.W.3d 657 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (abuse of discretion standard for habeas rulings)
Ex parte Moody, 991 S.W.2d 856 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (case-life context for prejudice inquiry in plea cases)