State High Court Rules in Favor of Defendant Backed by Immigration Law Clinic Brief

In August, the California Supreme Court ruled that a defendant had not been properly advised of the immigration consequences before pleading guilty to two drug offenses in 2013.

UC Davis School of Law’s Immigration Law Clinic had filed an amicus brief in the case; Professor and Clinic Co-director Holly S. Cooper called the high court’s decision an important victory for immigrants.

P. v. Hernandez involves Kern County resident Angela Hernandez, who had been lawful permanent status for decades before accepting a plea deal in a marijuana case. Two years after her convictions, Hernandez made a trip to Mexico with the approval of probation officials. Upon her return, she was detained by immigration authorities who initiated removal proceedings based on her convictions.

Hernandez subsequently filed a petition for habeas corpus in Kern County Superior Court, arguing that her attorney had not properly advised her of the immigration consequences of her plea deal.

The superior and appellate courts held that Hernandez had been adequately warned, based on a signed plea form. The Supreme Court disagreed, maintaining that Hernandez had proved she lacked “meaningful” understanding of the immigration repercussions of her plea deal despite the signed form. The high court directed the trial court to grant Hernandez's motion, vacate the convictions, and conduct further proceedings.

Read more about the case in this Cal Matters  story.