Thursday, October 25, 2012
Here is my preview on SCOTUSblog of the oral argument before the Supreme Court on October 30 in Chaidez v. Holder. The issue in that case is the retroactive application of Padilla v. Kentucky (2010), in which the Court held that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim under the Sixth Amendment could be based on an attorney’s failure to inform a criminal defendant of the risk of deportation resulting from a plea agreement and criminal conviction.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in another immigration case, Moncrieff v. Holder, which involves the possible removal of a lawful immigrant for a criminal conviction based on possession of a few grams of marijuana.
UPDATE (November 1): Here is a transcript to the oral argument.