Supreme Court of California

Affirmatively providing bad advice regarding immigration consequences of guilty plea to immigrant defendant may support an ineffective assistance of counsel claim and is not barred by the collateral consequences doctrine.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/02/2001
• Published 04/02/2001

Judges

• WERDEGAR, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  Cynthia M. Sorman, San Diego, and Michelle C. Rogers, under appointments by the Supreme Court;  and Richard L. Waldron, Anaheim Hills, for Petitioner Hugo Rangel Resendiz., Law Offices of Norton Tooby and Norton Tooby, Oakland, for California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, Central American Resource Center, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and Immigrant Legal Resource Center as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner Hugo Rangel Resendiz., John Philipsborn, San Francisco, for California Attorneys for Criminal Justice as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner Hugo Rangel Resendiz.


• For Appellees:
  
• Daniel E. Lungren and Bill Lockyer, Attorneys General, George Williamson and David P. Druliner, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Esteban Hernandez, Janelle M. Boustany, Raquel M. Gonzales and Garrett Beaumont, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent State of California.,  Thomas J. Orloff, District Attorney (Alameda), William M. Baldwin, Assistant District Attorney, and Jeff H. Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, for Appellate Committee of the California District Attorney's Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Respondent State of California.