No. 21-5419

Dilang Dat v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-08-20
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-defense criminal-plea deportation deportation-consequences due-process-advice immigration-consequences ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel padilla-standard padilla-v-united-states strickland-test
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Immigration
Latest Conference: 2021-10-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does trial counsel advising a criminal defendant that he 'could' be deported for entering a guilty plea breach trial counsel's duty to give 'clear and correct' advice to a criminal defendant regarding deportation consequences of conviction as outlined in Padilla v. United States, and therefore place counsel's performance below the standard of reasonableness as laid out in the Strickland test?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Question Presented Does trial counsel advising a criminal defendant that he “could” be deported for entering a guilty plea breach trial counsel’s duty to give “clear and correct” advice to acriminal defendant regarding deportation consequences of conviction as outlined in Padilla v. United States, and therefore place counsel’s performance below the standard of reasonableness as laid out in the Strickland test? 1

Docket Entries

2021-10-12
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-09-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-08-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 20, 2021)

Attorneys

Dilang Dat
Terrance WaiteWaite & McWha, Petitioner
United States
Brian H. FletcherActing Solicitor General, Respondent