03/20/2020 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 14, 2020 Session GEORGE OVIASOJIE v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. SCE263556 Angelita Blackshear Dalton, Judge ___________________________________ No. M2019-00761-CCA-R3-PC ___________________________________ The petitioner, George Oviasojie, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing the post-conviction court erred in finding he received effective assistance of counsel prior to and during his guilty plea hearing. Upon our review of the record, arguments of the parties, and pertinent authorities, we affirm the denial of the petition. Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed J. ROSS DYER, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., and CAMILLE R. MCMULLEN, JJ., joined. Manuel B. Russ (on appeal) and William J. Conway (at hearing), Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, George Oviasojie. Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Benjamin A. Ball, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Glenn Funk, District Attorney General; and Amy M. Hunter, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. OPINION Facts and Procedural History On February 1, 2018, the petitioner pled guilty to theft of property valued at $1,000 or less.1 He was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days of supervised probation which was to run consecutive to the petitioner’s prior sentence for a vandalism conviction. The petitioner later filed a timely pro se petition for post-conviction relief.2 Following the appointment of counsel, the petitioner filed an amended petition for post- 1 The transcript of the guilty plea hearing is not included in the record. 2 The petitioner’s pro se petition for post-conviction relief is not included in the record. conviction relief, arguing trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise the petitioner of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea. An evidentiary hearing was held on March 1, 2019, during which trial counsel, the petitioner, and Mary Kathryn Harcombe testified. Trial counsel, who had been licensed for “a little over a year” at the time of the post-conviction hearing, testified he was initially retained to represent the petitioner on a petition to reinstate his probation regarding a prior vandalism conviction. However, after meeting with the petitioner in jail, trial counsel learned the petitioner had recently been charged with theft and agreed to negotiate a plea deal on his behalf. Regarding his knowledge and experience with immigration law, trial counsel testified he had taken one continuing legal education course that covered the intersection between criminal and immigration law. However, trial counsel was unable to discuss the differences between immigration classifications or how a criminal conviction may affect each classification. Trial counsel was aware that theft is considered a crime of moral turpitude and would, therefore, have a greater impact on immigration status than a probation violation. When discussing the petitioner’s immigration status, the petitioner informed trial counsel that he was eligible to become a naturalized citizen in five years, and trial counsel advised the petitioner that any guilty ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals