United States v. Kerry Newman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that before Padilla, “defense attorneys had no duty to advise their clients about the immigration consequences of pleading guilty”
• taking note of the factors considered for coram nobis petitions in Faison and Riedl, which cases included the Article III standing requirement
• taking note of the factors considered for coram nobis petitions in Faison and Riedl, which cases included the Article III standing requirement
• applying the Strickland framework to consider an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a coram nobis petition
• taking note of the factors considered for coram nobis petitions in Faison and Riedl, which cases included the Article III standing requirement
• describing the holding of United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502 (1954)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).