crimmigration.com

The intersection of criminal law and immigration law

  • Home
  • About César
  • Articles
  • Books
  • Talks & Media

Utah v. Strieff and the Exclusionary Rule’s Future in Immigration Court – Part II

By Katie Tinto The availability of the exclusionary rule as a remedy for unconstitutional police conduct was recently further restricted by the Supreme Court in Utah v. Strieff, ___ S. Ct. ___, No. 14-1373 (June 20, 2016). In a prior blog post, I warned of the potential of Strieff to seriously limit the availability of the suppression remedy in immigration court. Although the exclusionary rule in immigration court may not be directly impacted, the decision will likely have a detrimental effect on our immigrant communities and the manner in which they are policed. To quickly summarize the [...]

Posted by César on August 9, 2016 on 4:00 am Leave a Comment
Filed Under: 4th Amendment, guest blogger, motion to suppress, U.S. Supreme Court, Utah state court

Utah v. Strieff and the Exclusionary Rule’s Future in Immigration Court

By Katie Tinto Immigration scholars and practitioners should pay close attention to the outcome of Utah v. Strieff, a Fourth Amendment case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court two weeks ago. 357 P.3d 532 (Utah 2015), cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 27 (U.S. Oct. 1, 2015) (No. 14-1373). In this case, the police detained Mr. Strieff without reasonable suspicion, and then, after obtaining his identification, ran a routine warrant check on his name and discovered an outstanding arrest warrant for a traffic violation. During the search incident to arrest on the traffic warrant, the officer found [...]

Posted by César on March 10, 2016 on 4:00 am Leave a Comment
Filed Under: 4th Amendment, guest blogger, motion to suppress, U.S. Supreme Court, Utah state court

Utah Supreme Court: When all else fails, civil procedure can remedy ineffective assistance of counsel

By Sarah Flinn Sergio Meza filed an action under Utah state law for ineffective assistance of counsel after learning of the immigration consequences for his no contest plea to two drug charges pursuant to a plea in abeyance agreement. Meza v. State, 2015 WL 4878268, at *1 (Utah Aug. 14, 2015). Mr. Meza asserted that he had a right to relief under the Post-Conviction Remedies Act of Utah (PCRA) due to the ineffective assistance of counsel, namely, the failure of his attorney to advise him of the immigration consequences of his plea. Id. The Supreme Court of Utah ultimately concluded that Mr. [...]

Posted by César on October 13, 2015 on 4:00 am 1 Comment
Filed Under: conviction, Crimmigration Law book, guest blogger, Padilla v. Kentucky, post-conviction relief, right to counsel, state court, Utah state court

Subscribe


Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court says Biden can end MPP
  • Uvalde massacre & immigration law aid
  • Mistakes aren’t reviewable, Supreme Court says
  • ICE prosecutorial discretion guidance
  • Supreme Court again considers ICE’s detention powers
  • Troubled contractor gets $180 million to hold young migrants

Search

Social Media

Blawg 100 Honoree

The information contained on these pages must not be considered legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. This work by www.crImmigration.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.