|
Good morning, I have discussed Padilla v Kentucky some more with Tim Baughman
and incorporating Padilla into our court rules dealing with the advice of
rights that a trial court must give defendants who wish to plead guilty or nolo
contendere. At our meeting last week, we discussed the plea form used in
Kentucky and the fact that it advises defendants that there may be immigration
consequences if they plead guilty. Upon closer reading of that section of the
opinion, it appears that the form that I referenced on Friday was not in use
when Padilla entered his plea. Mr. Baughman believes that if it had been in
use and signed by Padilla that the United States Supreme Court may have addressed
how such a form affects a defendant's abilitly to satisfy the prejudice prong of
the ineffective assistance of counsel analysis. This does not change my support or postion for how our court
rules should be amended. In fact, I think it amplifies the importance of
modifying our court rules to comport with Padilla. But I did want to correct
my misapprehension of this section of the opinion. Thanks and have a great day, Julie From: Hoort, Judge
[mailto:dhoort@ioniacounty.org] One more reminder and/or plea!!! If you cannot make it in
person this afternoon, please try to call. We are right on the edge so
far as having a quorum and your phone call could make the difference. Judge David A. Hoort 8th Judicial Circuit Court http://judgedavidhoort.blogspot.com/ “[T]he
question of whether sick people are to be treated for their illness or punished
for it, is a question which touches the very heart of judicial consciousness of
a civilized system of jurisprudence. If, perchance, the parties or
counsel fail to raise the matter our courts cannot close their eyes to so
important a matter.” People v Griffes, 13 Mich App 299, 306
(1968). |