Saturday, January 28th, 2017

New Jersey Supreme Court, 5-2, Rules Padilla Not Retroactive: Gaitan & Gouldbourne

0

Majority nutshell: "We ... conclude that Padilla represents a new constitutional rule of law that, for Sixth Amendment purposes, is not entitled to retroactive application on collateral review under Teague. We cannot say that prior to issuance of the holding in Padilla, attorneys would have known or expected that the constitutional benchmark for effective assistance of counsel required that they advise noncitizen clients of the risk of immigration consequences, and further that they must do so even when the risk of those consequences is not clearly predictable. ... In sum, based on our review of the pertinent standards and persuasive authority available, we hold that Padilla’s new constitutional pronouncement is not entitled to retroactive application on collateral review based on federal retroactivity standards."

Blistering dissent nutshell: "Any