State v. Guzman
2016 Ohio 1487
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Defendant Raimundo Guzman, a lawful permanent resident from the Dominican Republic, pled guilty on January 24, 2011 to amended charge of fourth-degree felony trafficking in marijuana and was sentenced to five years community control.
- Guzman completed community control on September 10, 2013 and did not appeal his conviction or sentence.
- In June 2015, while renewing his green card, Guzman learned his conviction could subject him to deportation and filed a Crim.R. 32.1 motion (June 30, 2015) to withdraw his guilty plea, alleging ineffective assistance for failure to advise about immigration consequences.
- Guzman submitted his own affidavit (would not have pled guilty if warned) and an affidavit from trial counsel stating counsel relied on the trial court’s admonition rather than giving immigration advice.
- The trial court denied the motion as res judicata; on appeal the Twelfth District reached the merits, finding Guzman had been warned by the court about deportation, had consulted an immigration attorney before sentencing, and failed to show prejudice or a "manifest injustice." The denial was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Guzman is entitled to post-sentence withdrawal of his guilty plea due to counsel's failure under Padilla to advise about immigration consequences (ineffective assistance) | State: Denial proper because court admonished Guzman about deportation, counsel referred him to immigration counsel, Guzman did not show prejudice or manifest injustice; doctrine of res judicata also applied | Guzman: Counsel was ineffective under Padilla for failing to accurately advise immigration consequences; but-for counsel's error he would not have pled guilty | Court affirmed denial: Guzman failed to prove prejudice under Strickland and did not show a manifest injustice; record shows court advisements and consultation with immigration attorney |
Key Cases Cited
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (Sixth Amendment requires counsel to advise noncitizen clients about clear immigration consequences of a plea)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)