*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the latest version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publica- tions, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. *********************************************** SERGIO ECHEVERRIA v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION (AC 40903) Lavine, Keller and Harper, Js. Syllabus The petitioner, a citizen of Bolivia, sought a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that his trial counsel had provided ineffective assistance by failing to advise him adequately as to the immigration consequences of his plea of guilty to certain offenses that subjected him to deportation. The petitioner initially was charged with offenses that exposed him to twelve years of imprisonment. After the petitioner received a plea offer from the state, the trial court indicated that it would allow the petitioner to enter an open guilty plea with no agreed upon sentence to two charges and offered to vacate the plea and grant the petitioner’s application for accelerated rehabilitation if the petitioner paid a $10,000 fine. The petitioner then entered a guilty plea. It was subsequently determined that the petitioner was ineligible for accelerated rehabilitation, and the state and the petitioner agreed on a sentence of five years of imprison- ment, execution suspended, with three years of probation. The petitioner did not ask to withdraw his guilty plea. After the petitioner was sen- tenced, deportation proceedings against him were initiated. At the habeas trial, the petitioner testified that, at the time he entered his plea, he understood that if it was determined that he was ineligible for accelerated rehabilitation, he could be deported. He also testified that he did not think he would be deported after he accepted a plea agreement that did not require him to serve any time in prison. The habeas court rendered judgment denying the habeas petition and granted the petition for certification to appeal, and the petitioner appealed to this court. Held that the habeas court properly rejected the petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim and denied the habeas petition, that court having properly determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals