Ex Parte Julian Hernandez, 398 S.W.3d 369

Hernandez, a lawful permanent resident since 2007, pleaded guilty to possession of alprazolam under a deferred adjudication and one-year community-supervision.
The trial court did not pronounce a sentence and discharged Hernandez after conditions were completed.
Hernandez challenges the plea as involuntary, alleging his counsel failed to warn that the plea would lead to certain deportation.
Hernandez pursued a habeas corpus writ under Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.072 seeking relief from immigration consequences.
The habeas court limited consideration to the written plea record, denying an evidentiary hearing and relief.
This Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held further evidentiary development was required to resolve the ineffective-assistance and prejudice issues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by restricting evidentiary development	Hernandez contends testimony is needed beyond the plea record.	Hernandez's plea record suffices; testimony unnecessary.	Remanded for further proceedings with evidentiary development
Whether plea counsel’s immigration-adverse advice was ineffective under Padilla	Counsel failed to warn of deportation consequences, making the plea involuntary.	Counsel adequately advised; no prejudice shown.	Need for further record development to assess prejudice
Whether there is a reasonable probability that Hernandez would have gone to trial but for counsel’s deficiency	But for the advice, Hernandez would not have pled guilty.	Even with deficient advice, trial would not be a rational alternative given circumstances.	Requires evidentiary development to determine prejudice

Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (deportation consequences must be warned when clear)
Ex parte Harrington, 310 S.W.3d 452 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) (ineffective assistance standard for guilty pleas)
Ex parte Hargett, 819 S.W.2d 866 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (habeas review of guilty plea validity under collateral consequences)
Ex parte Villanueva, 252 S.W.3d 391 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (hearing on habeas corpus not identical to merits determination)
Ex parte Sudhakar, 2012 Tex.App. LEXIS 10068 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2012) (remand for development of record in habeas cases)
Ex parte Alfaro, 378 S.W.3d 677 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2012) (trial court may resolve merits without evidentiary hearing)