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 [...]
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 [...]
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. [...]