Whether a Padilla constitutional waiver may be inferred without an evidentiary hearing by mere passage of time where defendant sought neither a direct appeal nor habeas relief, filing a writ of error coram nobis only after immigration proceedings had commenced several years after pleading guilty and after completion of his five-year sentence of incarceration

QUESTION PRESENTED In Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010), this Court held that the Sixth Amendment imposes on attorneys representing non-citizen criminal defendants a constitutional duty to advise the defendants about the potential removal consequences arising from a guilty plea. The question presented is whether a Padilla constitutional waiver may be inferred without an evidentiary hearing by mere passage of time where defendant sought neither a direct appeal nor habeas relief, filing a writ of error coram nobis only after immigration proceedings had commenced several years after pleading guilty and after completion of his fiveyear sentence of incarceration.