Padilla vs. Kentucky – Collateral Damage Control: The “Rest of the Story…” From the Trial Court Judge

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Easton, Kelly Mark

Issue Date

2022

Type

Thesis

Language

Keywords

Brady , collateral , consequences , deportation , immigration , Padilla

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Alternative Title

Abstract

Despite the number of years involved, one state court trial judge presided in Jose Padilla’s case from its inception, through proceedings with the United States Supreme Court, subsequent hearing and appeal about ineffective assistance of counsel, and the final completion of the case. Then that same judge presided over two important published cases developing the law established in Padilla v. Kentucky. The author developed the concept of the presiding judge writing an article about this experience. This would enable a presentation of circumstances not usually presented in appellate opinions, such as what happened to the attorneys and the litigants after the case came back to the trial court (twice). In addition to this “rest of the story” approach, the article provides an in-depth analysis of Kentucky’s experience with Padilla v. Kentucky and how it changed Kentucky law as well as national law. Ultimately, this thesis shows how the collateral consequences rule, which has important public policy benefits for the criminal justice system, could be salvaged without violence to the rule announced in Padilla. Practical options are offered to avoid guilty pleas without a defendant’s opportunity to understand and discuss important collateral consequences. Finally, the article submits the result of Jose Padilla’s case was just. Punishment for a crime was imposed, but deportation did not occur.

Description

Citation

Publisher

License

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 United States

Journal

Volume

Issue

PubMed ID

DOI

ISSN

EISSN