In People v. Mejia (2019) the California Appellate Court held that to establish prejudicial error under Penal Code section 1473.7, a defendant need only prove by a preponderance of the evidence: “(1) [he] did not ‘meaningfully understand’ or ‘knowingly accept’ the actual or potential adverse immigration consequences of the plea; and (2) had [he] understood the consequences, it is reasonably probably [he] would have instead attempted to ‘defend against’ the charges.” The prejudicial errors include Mr. Mejia’s own misunderstanding of the long-term immigration consequences of his plea as well as the absence of specific immigration advice from his own attorney and the trial court regarding how this conviction would affect his long-term prospect of becoming a United States citizen.
Keep in mind that the consequences of immigration crimes is a rapidly changing field, where developments are difficult to predict. The website in this article is intended to be an informational guide and is not a substitute for up-to-date, independent research on the immigration consequences of any offense and competent legal advice. If you would like legal advice regarding your specific situation, please call now to schedule a consultation.
Note that the immigration consequences of crimes is a fast-changing field, where developments are difficult to predict.
This website is meant to be an informational guide and is not a substitute for independent, up-to-date research into the immigration consequences of any offense and competent legal counsel. If you would like legal advice regarding your specific situation call now to schedule a consultation.