STATE
VS. PAULO BARROS
A-1288-10T2
In
this case, the court previously applied Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. __, 130 S.
Ct. 1473, 176 L. Ed. 2d 284 (2010), and affirmed the grant of post-conviction
relief based on defendant's assertion that his attorney did not advise him that
his guilty plea in 2008 to drug distribution charges subjected him to mandatory
deportation. The Supreme Court
granted
the State's petition for certification and remanded for the court's
reconsideration in light of State v. Gaitan, __ N.J. __ (2012), which held that
Padilla announced a new rule
applicable
only to guilty pleas entered after Padilla was decided. In light of Gaitan, the court reversed
the grant of post-conviction relief but also stayed its judgment to allow
defendant to seek habeas corpus relief in federal court in light of the
Third Circuit's determination in United States v. Orocio, 645 F.3d 630 (3d Cir.
2011), that Padilla does not constitute a new rule. 04-20-12
