Getting Rid of Your Criminal Conviction

As I pointed out in my last blog, the crossover between immigration and criminal law is one of the most complex areas of law today.  Non-citizens facing criminal charges risk not only criminal consequences such as imprisonment or fines; they also risk the severe consequence of deportation or removal from the United States.  It is imperative, that non-citizens have criminal counsel that understands both criminal law and immigration law in order to ensure that the conviction or plea is not going to have a devastating effect on their immigration status. 

In this installment, I want to talk about the most common motions for post-conviction relief here in California.  First, is the motion to vacate a conviction based on the fact that you did not get the proper advisals from the court at the time you pled to the crime.  This falls under California Penal Code sec. 1016.5 which, in summary, states that as part of taking a person's plea, the court must state:

 

"If you are not a citizen, you are hereby advised that conviction
of the offense for which you have been charged may have the
consequences of deportation, exclusion from admission to the United
States, or denial of naturalization pursuant to the laws of the
United States."

If the court did not state that advisal exactly as it is worded above, or in a way that included; deportation, exclusion from admission, or denial of naturalization; you can go back to court and have their conviction vacated.  With that being said, the ENTIRE criminal file must be reviewed by an attorney to determine if the court gave the advisal - it is NOT enough that you think the judge never said that.  Also, in many instances, these convictions are very old and the criminal files have been partially or completely destroyed.  An attorney must review the documents so that they can ascertain if you have enough (or in some cases if enough has been destroyed) to make an argument for vacature. 

Second, and MARKEDLY more difficult, is a motion to vacate based on the fact your previous defense ATTORNEY did not give you the proper advisals before taking a plea.  This motion is based on a decision from the US Supreme Court, Padilla v. Kentucky.  In that case, the Court found that no criminal defendant, whether a citizen or not, should be left to the “mercies of incompetent counsel”.  They went on to hold that criminal counsel must inform their clients whether their plea carries a risk of deportation.  Many criminal defense attorneys already advise clients about the fact that their plea may have immigration consequences.  The Supreme Court’s decision, however, holds that those advisals are constitutionally required and that a failure to provide them constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel.  Again, the entire criminal record must be reviewed so that your current attorney can determine who your last attorney was (which can sometimes be difficult if you had multiple public defenders) so that they can speak/consult with them regarding the case. 

With each of these motions, there is a "diligence" requirement, which basically means that you have to act to DO something about your conviction within a reasonable time of discovering it could hurt your immigration status.  This is often a sticking point for criminal courts because many people do not realize their conviction put their immigration status at risk until they go to renew their green card, or apply for naturalization.  This can mean that sometimes a DECADE has gone by since being convicted before you realize something is wrong and you need to go back to criminal court. 

Third are the smaller motions that can sometimes work to ameliorate immigration consequences, but not necessarily get rid of them all together.  For example, certain crimes for which you are sentenced to 365 or more, are considered AGGRAVATED FELONIES for immigraiton purposes.  If you have been convicted of an aggravated felony, that renders you ineligible for really ANY relief from removal in front of a judge.  If, however, you are able to go back to criminal court and REDUCE that sentence from 365 to 364, then you may at least be able to present your case to an immigration judge re: why you should not be removed from the U.S.  That is a motion to reduce, and similar to the above, it has a diligence requirement and often times, a jurisdiction problem that some courts will over look - others won't.  Most good post conviction relief attorneys will know whether the courts in their area will grant that type of motion or not - sometimes down to the judges that will and judges that won't.

Also, if you are in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (CA, AK, AZ, HI, ID, MO, NV, OR, WA) a conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance can be expunged as long as that conviction was before July 14, 2011.  An expungement prior to that date will be effective for immigration purposes - i.e. if that is the only reason you are before the immigration judge, your case can be quickly resolved - but it is only effective for ONE simple possession conviction. 

 

As always, but perhaps even MORE so in instances where immigration and criminal law cross, it is VERY important to seek competent legal counsel.