State v. Bozso (Slip Opinion)


[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State v. Bozso, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-3779.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2020-OHIO-3779 THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. BOZSO, APPELLEE. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State v. Bozso, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-3779.] Criminal law—Motion to withdraw a guilty plea—Ineffective assistance of counsel arising from counsel’s alleged failure to advise a noncitizen client of immigration consequences of entering a guilty plea—Defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and must demonstrate prejudice resulting from counsel’s deficient performance—Prejudice not demonstrated—Court of appeals’ judgment reversed. (No. 2018-1007—Submitted March 11, 2020—Decided July 23, 2020.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 106149, 2018-Ohio-1750. _____________________ FRENCH, J. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO {¶ 1} This appeal requires us to determine, once again, whether a noncitizen criminal defendant may withdraw a guilty plea on the grounds that his attorney failed to advise the defendant of the adverse immigration consequences of his plea. {¶ 2} In State v. Romero, 156 Ohio St.3d 468, 2019-Ohio-1839, 129 N.E.3d 404, we held that when a noncitizen criminal defendant alleges ineffective assistance of counsel arising from the plea process, the defendant must meet the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), and applied in the immigration context in Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010). Romero at ¶ 1, 3, and 14. First, the defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient. Id. at ¶ 15. When an attorney’s noncitizen client is considering a plea, counsel must inform her client whether the plea carries a risk of deportation. Id.; Padilla at 374. Second, the defendant must demonstrate prejudice resulting from counsel’s deficient performance. Romero at ¶ 16; Strickland at 687. {¶ 3} We now consider the second part of this test to determine whether defendant-appellee, Emeric Bozso, has met the requisite showing of prejudice— specifically, that he would not have entered a guilty plea but for the erroneous advice of his plea-stage counsel. Romero at ¶ 16; Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985). Based on the record before us, we conclude that Bozso has not demonstrated prejudice arising from his counsel’s deficient performance. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Eighth District Court of Appeals and reinstate Bozso’s convictions. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND {¶ 4} Bozso, a Romanian citizen, was admitted to the United States in 1986 as a refugee. He has been ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals