United States v. Shahzad Mathur

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Padilla has “little, if anything” to do with the accuracy of the fact-finding process because Padilla violations only occur once a defendant has pled guilty and submitted himself to sentencing
• finding that lack of awareness of potential deportation, while unjust, “nevertheless does not cast doubt on the verity of the defendant’s admission of guilt or the propriety of the sentence imposed pursuant to the plea agreement”
• affirming dismissal of Motion to Vacate as untimely where motion was filed beyond one-year limitation and did not fall within purview of § 2255(f)(3)
• assuming without deciding that Padilla created a new rule
• We are “not authorize[d] to read between the lines of a prior opinion to discern whether that opinion, by implication, made a new rule retroactively applicable on collateral review. The only way to make a new rule retroactive ‘is through a ‘holding,’ not through dictum.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).