Thursday, October 20, 2011

Judicial Obligations After Padilla v. Kentucky

From the Immigrant Defense Project:

IDP is excited to announce the publication of Judicial Obligations After Padilla v. Kentucky: The Role of Judges in Upholding Defendants' Rights to Advice About the Immigration Consequences of Criminal Dispositions. This October 2011 report is intended to be used in efforts to educate criminal court judges about the implications of the Padilla decision and to recommend best practices for judges to protect the rights of noncitizen defendants under that decision. The report was prepared for IDP by Nikki Reisch and Sara Rosell of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at New York University School of Law under the supervision of Alina Das, NYU Professor of Clinical Law, and with the guidance of Benita Jain and Manuel Vargas of the IDP.  The authors would like to thank the following people who provided invaluable input and feedback throughout the research and writing process: Heidi Altman, Neighborhood Defender Service of Harlem; Ann Benson, Washington Defender Association; Jennifer Friedman, The Bronx Defenders; Randy Hertz, New York University School of Law; Angie Junck, Immigrant Legal Resource Center; Dan Kesselbrenner, National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild; Holly Maguigan, New York University School of Law; Lindsay Nash, Yale Liman Fellow, Cardozo Immigration Justice Clinic; Sarah Deri Oshiro, The Bronx Defenders; Norton Tooby, The Law Offices of Norton Tooby; and Marianne Yang, Brooklyn Defender Services.

The report can be found here.


| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Judicial Obligations After Padilla v. Kentucky: