Farhane v. United States

Summary

The Second Circuit held that civil denaturalization is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea, and thus counsel’s failure to warn of denaturalization or subsequent deportation does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance under *Strickland v. Washington*. The court reaffirmed the direct/collateral distinction post-*Padilla v. Kentucky*, limiting *Padilla*’s holding to deportation and declining to extend it to denaturalization because denaturalization lacks the “automatic” relationship to conviction that deportation has. The opinion also addressed the waiver of a *Teague* defense and the distinction between Fifth Amendment due process obligations of a court and Sixth Amendment obligations of counsel.

Holdings

1. The Sixth Amendment does not require attorneys to warn of the risk of denaturalization because denaturalization is a collateral consequence of a conviction, and collateral consequences are categorically removed from the scope of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Sixth Amendment requires defense counsel to warn a naturalized citizen client of the risk of denaturalization and subsequent deportation before the client enters a guilty plea.
2. Whether the direct/collateral consequences distinction remains viable after Padilla v. Kentucky for consequences other than deportation.
3. Whether civil denaturalization is a direct or collateral consequence of a guilty plea.

Disposition

affirmed