October Term 2009 · Docket 08-651
Must lawyers warn clients about deportation risks before a guilty plea?
The dispute centers on whether criminal lawyers must advise clients about immigration consequences when recommending a guilty plea.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Stephen Kinnaird argued the Kentucky Supreme Court rule was too restrictive of the Sixth Amendment.
The United States Government disavowed the restrictive rule announced by the Kentucky Supreme Court.
Justice Scalia questioned whether the Court should open a Pandora's box by restricting advice to deportation.
Justice Scalia asked about advice regarding custody loss, noting it is a serious consequence.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Padilla v. Kentucky asks if the Sixth Amendment requires lawyers to warn clients about deportation risks before a guilty plea.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 13, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to require lawyers to advise clients about deportation risks.
the opposing side wants the Court to limit legal duties to general criminal advice.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the Sixth Amendment mandates specific advice on immigration consequences.
the opposing side argues that requiring such advice expands legal duties beyond traditional criminal defense.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if contract law principles regarding mistake risk apply to this situation.
Justice Alito asked why the duty would limit to guilty pleas rather than trial verdicts with lesser consequences.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of legal advice required for criminal pleas. It determines whether lawyers must explain immigration risks to clients. The outcome shapes the standard of care for criminal defense attorneys nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-23 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-3
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 31-1 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 31-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 34, lines 51-27 — Transcript, file page 34, lines 51-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.