278 P.3d 569
N.M. Ct. App.2012Background
- Petitioner Martin Ramirez, also known as Richard Sanchez, sought coram nobis to vacate a 12-year-old misdemeanor conviction.
- Paredez requires defense counsel to inform non-citizen defendants of specific immigration consequences before pleading guilty.
- Padilla holds counsel must inform whether plea carries risk of deportation.
- District court denied relief, ruling Paredez not retroactive to collateral review.
- Appellate court held Paredez and Padilla are retroactive and remanded for potential withdrawal of the plea.
- Convictions involved possession of marijuana (under one ounce), drug paraphernalia, and concealing identity; AEDPA affected discretionary relief from deportation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Paredez and Padilla apply retroactively on collateral review. | Ramirez—retroactive. | State—rule not retroactive. | Paredez/Padilla are retroactive. |
| What is the proper retroactivity framework for Paredez/Padilla under Teague? | Retroactivity under Teague allows retroactive application. | Old rule analysis supports non-retroactivity. | Padilla and Paredez constitute old rules retroactive under Teague. |
| Was Petitioner prejudiced by lack of immigration-consequences advice before pleading guilty? | Petitioner lacked information to decide plea; prejudice shown. | State did not contest factual basis; no prejudice established. | Petitioner established deficient performance and prejudice; remand for withdrawal opportunity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paredez v. State, 136 N.M. 533 (N.M. 2004) (ineffective assistance for failing to advise on immigration consequences; retroactivity analyzed)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (S. Ct. 2010) (counsel must inform client whether plea carries deportation risk; retroactivity analyzed under Teague framework)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (U.S. 1989) (test for retroactivity of new rules on collateral review)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (U.S. 2000) (established framework for evaluating Strickland claims; general applicability of rule)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (plea-related collateral challenges; lack of flood of collateral claims)
- Immigration & Naturalization Serv. v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (U.S. 2001) (discretionary relief before deportation; context for deportation consequences)