Filed: Apr. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 12, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS LARRY ALAN BURNS , Chief District Judge . After pleading guilty to one count of importation of marijuana, Juan Torres-Valencia, a Mexican national, was sentenced to five years' probation. Over seven and a half years later, through counsel, he filed a petition for writ of coram nobis, claiming his trial counsel failed to warn him that as a result of his guilty plea he might be deported. The record shows that Torres-Valencia was aware of the pos
Summary: ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS LARRY ALAN BURNS , Chief District Judge . After pleading guilty to one count of importation of marijuana, Juan Torres-Valencia, a Mexican national, was sentenced to five years' probation. Over seven and a half years later, through counsel, he filed a petition for writ of coram nobis, claiming his trial counsel failed to warn him that as a result of his guilty plea he might be deported. The record shows that Torres-Valencia was aware of the poss..
More
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CORAM NOBIS
LARRY ALAN BURNS, Chief District Judge.
After pleading guilty to one count of importation of marijuana, Juan Torres-Valencia, a Mexican national, was sentenced to five years' probation. Over seven and a half years later, through counsel, he filed a petition for writ of coram nobis, claiming his trial counsel failed to warn him that as a result of his guilty plea he might be deported.
The record shows that Torres-Valencia was aware of the possibility of deportation, and in fact stipulated to removal. The Court ordered him to show cause why his petition should not be summarily denied, both as meritless and as untimely. He filed a response, which the Court determined did not adequately explain his lengthy delay. The Court on September 21, 2018 ordered him to file a response within 21 days, addressing specific problems in his explanation. (Docket no. 9 in case 17cv2397 and 32 in case 11cr5171.) That order reminded him that, as the party seeking to set aside his conviction, he bears the burden of showing he is entitled to relief. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).
After Torres-Valencia filed no response, the Court on January 16, 2019 ordered him to show cause forthwith why his petition should not be summarily denied. (See Docket no. 10 in case 17cv2397 and 32 in case 11cr5171.) He was to have filed his response by January 30, 2019. If he did not, the Court cautioned him, his failure to respond would be construed as both an admission that he has no good explanation for his delay in seeking relief, and as an abandonment of his claim.
Torres-Valencia did not file the response as ordered, nor has he filed anything else, nor sought additional time in which to do so. The Court construes this as an admission that he has no good explanation for his long delay in seeking relief, and also as an abandonment of his claim. For these reasons, and for the reasons set forth in the Court's earlier orders (Docket nos. 9 and 10 in case 17cv2397; and 32 and 33 in case 11cr5171) the petition is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
