Advising a Criminal Defendant Who is an Undocumented Alien
Adopted: April 22, 2011
Opinion rules that a criminal defense lawyer may advise an undocumented alien that deportation may result in avoidance of a criminal conviction and may file a notice of appeal to superior court although there is a possibility that the client will be deported.
Inquiry #1:
Client A is arrested for driving while impaired. The magistrate sets a secured bond of $2000, schedules the trial for district court and notifies U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that Client A may be in the country illegally. Client A is taken to the county jail to wait for trial. At Client A’s first appearance, the judge appoints Attorney A to defend him.
ICE determines that Client A is an undocumented alien and gives the jail notice that it should be advised when Client A is released. Once Client A’s bond is paid, Client A will be held in the jail for an additional 48 hours to give ICE the opportunity to begin proceedings. If ICE does not serve Client A with a notice to appear within this time period, the jail will release him.
Client A tells Attorney A that he wants to be deported as soon as possible and does not want a conviction on his record. Attorney A discusses Client A’s options with him. If Client A pays the bond, ICE will probably come to the jail, transport him to a federal holding facility and begin removal proceedings within 48 hours of paying the bond. Once Client A is deported, the State might dismiss Client A’s DWI charge. Attorney A knows that, should Client A someday choose to re-enter the United States legally, a DWI conviction would be detrimental to an immigration application or an application for a work permit.
Attorney A is aware that the existence of an ICE detainer is only an indication that Client A might be removed before the resolution of the case. ICE may choose not to pick Client A up; it may serve him and then release him pending a removal hearing; it may offer him an immigration bond which can be posted so that he can secure his release during immigration proceedings; or he may be eligible for a remedy, such as cancellation of removal, which would allow him to receive permanent residency in the United States.
Did Attorney A violate the Rules of Professional Conduct by advising Client A of his legal option to pay the bond?
Opinion #1:
No. Although a lawyer may not assist a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, a lawyer “may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client”. Rule 1.2(d).. Advising Client A of his legal option to pay the bond and face possible deportation is appropriate advice for a competent lawyer to give to a client under these circumstances.
Inquiry #2:
May Attorney A move for a continuance of the trial to give Client A more time to pay the bond?
Opinion #2:
Yes. See Opinion #1.
Inquiry #3:
Client A and Attorney A decide that Client A will plead guilty to DWI in district court because Client A has been unable to raise the money necessary to pay the bond. Client A is sentenced to time served. The jail immediately notifies ICE that it has 48 hours to pick up Client A before he is released. ICE takes custody of Client A and transports him to a federal holding facility. Attorney A knows that Client A has the right to appeal for a trial de novo in superior court. Attorney A also knows that the superior court may dismiss the case if Client A is deported.
May Attorney A enter a notice of appeal knowing that Client A’s pending deportation may result in the dismissal of the superior court case?
Opinion #3:
Rule 3.1 prohibits a lawyer from advancing frivolous or meritless proceedings or arguments but permits a lawyer in a criminal proceeding that may result in incarceration the leeway to “so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established.” Comment [1] to the rule observes that “[t]he advocate has a duty to use legal procedure for the fullest benefit of the client's cause, but also a duty not to abuse legal procedure.” Rule 3.2 requires a lawyer to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation “consistent with the interests of the client”. However, comment [1] to this rule adds, “[t]he question is whether a competent lawyer acting in good faith would regard the course of action as having some substantial purpose other than delay.”
Filing a notice of appeal for Client A is not, in itself, frivolous or meritless because Client A has a constitutional right to a trial de novo in superior court before a jury. The question is whether the pleading is interposed for an improper purpose which would violate not only Rule 3.1 but also the prohibition on conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice set forth in Rule 8.4(d).
Rule 3.3(a)(1) prohibits a lawyer from knowingly making a false statement of material fact to a court. This prohibition applies to statements in pleadings as well as to statements in open court. Rule 3.3, cmt. [3]. Comment [3] to the rule adds that “[t]here are circumstances where failure to make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation.”
Although Attorney A believes that Client A may not be available for trial in superior court, a client’s presence is not always necessary to resolve a case in superior court. If a trial is necessary, it can be done by written waiver if the court permits. Moreover, by the time the case is reached for trial, the client may, in fact, be available. Lastly, it is unlikely that the State will actually dismiss the charges simply because the defendant has been removed. Therefore, filing a notice of appeal for Client A does not violate the rules.