Whether a petitioner detained by ICE due to deportation proceedings can satisfy the 'in custody' requirement under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 after completing a criminal sentence, particularly in light of Padilla v. Kentucky's treatment of deportation consequences

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Whether Petitioner Satisfies the in-custody requirements of 2254 Petition when he continued to suffer consequences of deportation as a result of the underlying conviction especially in light of this court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky holding that consequences of removal can no longer simply be dismissed as merely a “collateral consequence” of a conviction or plea. 2. Whether a petitioner, who was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) due to deportation proceedings stemming from a conviction, satisfies the “in custody” requirement under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, even after the completion of the underlying criminal sentence. 3. Whether the erroneous legal advice regarding deportation consequences provided by defense counsel, in violation of *Padilla v. Kentucky (559 U.S. 356 (2010)), can trigger a narrow exception to the “in custody” requirement, allowing a habeas corpus petition under § 2254. 4, Whether this Court should clarify that deportation, in light of *Padilla*, is no longer a mere collateral consequence of a criminal conviction but constitutes a direct legal consequence that warrants relief under § 2254 when counsel was ineffective. i