State v. Sabillon, 280 Ga. 1

622 S.E.2d 846 (2005) · Supreme Court of Georgia · November 21, 2005 · No. S05A1190

Summary

The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the grant of habeas corpus relief to Jose Sabillon, who alleged ineffective assistance of counsel based on incorrect advice about the immigration consequences of his guilty plea. The court held that although counsel's performance was deficient, Sabillon failed to present competent evidence establishing a reasonable probability that he would have proceeded to trial absent the advice. The court emphasized that conclusory statements from counsel were insufficient to prove prejudice under Strickland.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the Court
Melton, Justice; Sears, Chief Justice; All other Justices of the Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction
Georgia
Decision date
November 21, 2005
Docket number
S05A1190
Procedural posture
The State appealed the grant of Sabillon's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, in which the habeas court found ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel's incorrect advice concerning the immigration consequences of a guilty plea.
Standard of review
The court applied the two-part Strickland test for ineffective assistance of counsel and reviewed whether the evidence established a reasonable probability that Sabillon would have rejected the guilty plea and proceeded to trial.
Precedential value
Published Georgia Supreme Court opinion and binding precedent in the jurisdiction.
Parties
State v. Jose Sabillon
Disposition
reversed

Topics

ineffective assistanceplea bargaininghabeas corpuscriminal procedureimmigration

Practice areas

criminal procedurepost-conviction reliefineffective assistance of counselplea bargainingimmigration consequences of criminal convictions

Questions Presented

  1. Whether affirmative misadvice concerning the immigration consequences of a guilty plea may support an ineffective-assistance claim under the Sixth Amendment.
  2. Whether Sabillon established the prejudice prong of Strickland by showing a reasonable probability that, absent counsel's misadvice, he would have rejected the guilty plea and proceeded to trial.
  3. Whether the habeas court properly excluded Sabillon's affidavit because it was not served on the State at least ten days before the habeas hearing as required by OCGA § 9-14-48.

Holdings

  1. A defendant who alleges that counsel affirmatively misrepresented the collateral consequences of a guilty plea may pursue an ineffective-assistance claim analyzed under the two-part Strickland test.
  2. Sabillon failed to establish prejudice because he presented no competent evidence showing a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would have rejected the guilty plea and insisted on going to trial.
  3. The habeas court properly excluded Sabillon's affidavit because it was first presented to the State on the day of the hearing, rather than being served at least ten days before the hearing.

Key quotations

In the absence of any evidence of his mindset, Sabillon has not proven prejudice because he has provided nothing on which to determine whether there was a reasonable probability, rather than an abstract possibility, that he would have chosen to go to trial. (848)

Factual background

Sabillon, a Honduran resident alien, pleaded guilty to felony possession of 170 grams of marijuana found in his home and received four years of probation under Georgia's First Offender Act. His sentence was discharged without an adjudication of guilt in 1999. He later faced deportation proceedings and alleged that trial counsel had advised him that the guilty plea would not affect his immigration status. At the habeas hearing, Sabillon did not testify, and the only admitted evidence supporting his claim was his former counsel's conclusory declaration.

Procedural history

Sabillon pleaded guilty in 1995 to felony possession of marijuana and received a four-year first-offender probationary sentence. After immigration authorities initiated deportation proceedings, he filed a state habeas petition in 2004 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court granted habeas relief, and the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed because Sabillon failed to prove prejudice under Strickland.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…