{
  "id": 2528045,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO LUNA, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Luna",
  "decision_date": "1991-03-13",
  "docket_number": "No. 1\u201490\u20140328",
  "first_page": "390",
  "last_page": "394",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 Ill. App. 3d 390"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "132 Ill. 2d 550",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "550 N.E.2d 1155",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 Ill. App. 3d 159",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        8498212
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/194/0159-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "502 N.E.2d 1182",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "151 Ill. App. 3d 297",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3540055
      ],
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/151/0297-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "540 N.E.2d 1008",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "184 Ill. App. 3d 718",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2639958
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/184/0718-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "559 N.E.2d 126",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1989,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 3d 492",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2593112
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1989,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/201/0492-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "485 N.E.2d 307",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "108 Ill. 2d 541",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3129823
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/108/0541-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "474 U.S. 52",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6197970
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/474/0052-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "560 N.E.2d 1104",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 Ill. App. 3d 160",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2582466
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/203/0160-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "466 U.S. 668",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6204802
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1990,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/466/0668-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "473 N.E.2d 1246",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "104 Ill. 2d 504",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3147214
      ],
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/104/0504-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "542 N.E.2d 1155",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "186 Ill. App. 3d 816",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        2658793
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/186/0816-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "100 Stat. 3359",
      "category": "laws:leg_session",
      "reporter": "Stat.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 410,
    "char_count": 6690,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.746,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.5249460555207457e-07,
      "percentile": 0.669982303987607
    },
    "sha256": "c14f5a79e89d5bebb51d4a77794b551a2a8c24d73cb9e91f5dc2653b8afad278",
    "simhash": "1:31b068d82e97379f",
    "word_count": 1079
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:56:54.383547+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO LUNA, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE WHITE\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis appeal involves whether the petition for post-conviction relief (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 122\u20141 et seq.) of Ricardo Luna (hereinafter defendant), an alien, is sufficient to state a claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel with respect to his plea of guilty to a forgery charge in 1985. The defendant\u2019s post-conviction petition and affidavit indicated that the defendant\u2019s trial counsel (the public defender of Cook County) \u201cnever discussed anything about [his] citizen status or the effect the plea of guilty would have on [his] chances to stay in the United States.\u201d The trial court dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing, and defendant appeals.\nDefendant is an alien who was illegally residing in this country. In 1985, he pleaded guilty to forgery (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 38, par. 17\u20143) and received one year\u2019s probation. The probation terminated on July 29, 1986. Defendant then sought legalization under the Immigration Reform Control Act (Pub. Law 99\u2014603, 100 Stat. 3359, 8 U.S.C. 1255(a) (1988)) which was effective from November 1986 until May 1988. However, defendant was denied amnesty because of this Class 3 felony conviction.\nOn August 25, 1989, defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 122\u20141 et seq.) requesting that his 1985 guilty plea be vacated on the ground that it was involuntary because of ineffective assistance of counsel when the plea was entered. Defendant asserted that he was never told of any potential immigration consequences for entering a plea of guilty. Defendant stated that he would not have pleaded guilty if he had been advised that he could be deported because of his guilty plea. The record does not contain an affidavit of the attorney who had represented him at the 1985 forgery proceedings culminating in defendant\u2019s guilty plea.\nAsa threshold matter, we note that a defendant who seeks to have his guilty plea vacated because he was never advised that it could result in deportation is not precluded from seeking relief under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (Act) (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 122\u20141 et seq.). Even though defendant has completed his term of probation, the consequence of deportation is a drastic one which is usually more severe than the penalty imposed by the court in response to the plea. Accordingly, section 122\u20141 of the Act provides the appropriate method for the present defendant to belatedly assert those rights. People v. Saks (1989), 186 Ill. App. 3d 816, 542 N.E.2d 1155.\nA petition for post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel must allege facts to show that the attorney\u2019s representation fell below an objective standard of competence, and that, to a degree of reasonable probability, the attorney\u2019s ineffective assistance affected the outcome of the proceeding. (People v. Albanese (1984), 104 Ill. 2d 504, 473 N.E.2d 1246, citing Strickland v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674, 104 S. Ct. 2052; Lotero v. People (1990), 203 Ill. App. 3d 160, 560 N.E.2d 1104.) Where a defendant contends that his attorney\u2019s ineffective assistance rendered his guilty plea involuntary, the defendant must show that his attorney\u2019s advice did not satisfy the objective standard of competence expected of attorneys in criminal cases, and to a degree of reasonable probability defendant would not have entered his guilty plea if his attorney had given him competent advice. Hill v. Lockhart (1985), 474 U.S. 52, 88 L. Ed. 2d 203, 106 S. Ct. 366; People v. Correa (1985), 108 Ill. 2d 541, 485 N.E.2d 307.\nIt is the responsibility of defense counsel to research and advise the alien defendant of the immigration consequences of a plea of guilty to a felony charge. (People v. Maranovic (1990), 201 Ill. App. 3d 492, 559 N.E.2d 126; People v. Miranda (1989), 184 Ill. App. 3d 718, 540 N.E.2d 1008; People v. Padilla (1986), 151 Ill. App. 3d 297, 502 N.E.2d 1182; see also People v. Huante (1990), 194 Ill. App. 3d 159, 550 N.E.2d 1155, appeal allowed (1990), 132 Ill. 2d 550 (defendant\u2019s trial counsel has duty to inquire of defendant\u2019s immigration status where circumstances place counsel on notice that his client might be alien).) The determination of whether the failure to investigate potential deportation consequences constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel turns upon whether the trial attorney had sufficient information to form a reasonable belief that defendant was in fact an alien. People v. Maranovic (1990), 201 Ill. App. 3d 492, 559 N.E.2d 126; People v. Huante (1990), 194 Ill. App. 3d 159, 550 N.E.2d 1155.\nDefendant has stated in his affidavit that his trial counsel \u201cnever discussed anything about [his] citizen status or the effect the plea of guilty would have on [Ms] chances to stay in the United States.\u201d If defendant\u2019s trial counsel had sufficient information to reasonably believe that defendant was an alien and had failed to advise him of the potential immigration consequences resulting from entering a plea of guilty to a felony charge, the representation provided by defendant\u2019s trial counsel would fall below the objective range of competence expected of attorneys in such criminal matters. We hold that defendant\u2019s post-conviction petition was sufficient to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel which would render involuntary his 1985 plea of guilty to the charge of forgery. Accordingly, we reverse the order dismissing defendant\u2019s post-conviction petition for relief and remand the cause for an evidentiary hearing on the matter.\nDefendant also argues that his claim should have been considered under the common law civil writs of error coram vobis and audita querela. Those procedures have been abolished. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 110, pars. 2\u20141401(a), 12\u2014183(g).) We believe that the relief under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act was the proper avenue for this defendant to pursue. People v. Saks (1989), 186 Ill. App. 3d 816, 542 N.E.2d 1155.\nFor the foregoing reasons, the order of the circuit court is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.\nReversed and remanded.\nCERDA, P.J., and RIZZI, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE WHITE"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McCarthy, Duffy, Neidhart & Snakard, of Chicago (Thomas Moore, Kevin Kulling, and John Lydon, of counsel), for appellant.",
      "Jack O\u2019Malley, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Renee Goldfarb, Howard Weisman, and Alexandria Buzanis, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO LUNA, Defendant-Appellant.\nFirst District (3rd Division)\nNo. 1\u201490\u20140328\nOpinion filed March 13, 1991.\nMcCarthy, Duffy, Neidhart & Snakard, of Chicago (Thomas Moore, Kevin Kulling, and John Lydon, of counsel), for appellant.\nJack O\u2019Malley, State\u2019s Attorney, of Chicago (Renee Goldfarb, Howard Weisman, and Alexandria Buzanis, Assistant State\u2019s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0390-01",
  "first_page_order": 412,
  "last_page_order": 416
}