Source: https://adrianciduribe.com/motions_to_vacate/writ_of_habeas_corpus
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 10:21:27+00:00

Document:
A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the lawfulness of imprisonment, conditions of confinement, or other actual or constructive restraint on personal liberty. This writ is typically used to challenge the validity of the petitioner's conviction or sentence when facts supporting the claim are not apparent from the trial record. A writ of habeas corpus can be a tool used to vacate a conviction for immigration purposes if the defendant did not know that the conviction he or she entered into would cause them to suffer adverse immigration consequences.
The appropriate means of raising a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is either by direct appeal or by a petition of a writ of habeas corpus. Both the United States Constitution and the California Constitution give a criminal defendant the right to assistance of counsel. The right to counsel entitles a defendant to effective counsel. The standard against which counsel's effectiveness will be measured is that of "reasonably competent" attorney who acts as a "dilegent conscientious advocate." Under this standard a defendant may reasonably expect that before counsel undertakes to act at all he will make a rational and informed decision on strategy and tactics founded on adequate investigation and preparation. In short strategic choices made after inadequate investigation fall short of providing effective assistance if "reaasonable professional judgment" would not support the limitation on investigation. In order for a defendant to demonstrate that ineffective assistance requires reversal of his convictionb he must demonstrate first, that his counsel's performance was deficient, and second, that he was prejudiced by that deficiency.
This standard requires defense counsel to aid the defendant in reaching a decision regarding a plea agreement by advising a defendant, after appropriate investigation, of the alternatives available and of considerations deemed important by defense counsel or the defendant in reaching a decision.
Before a court can accept a defendant's plea, a court must first make a finding that a guilty plea (guilty or no contest) was made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently by the defendant entering the plea. In re Johnson (1965). Case law has held that a prosecutor and the court can later prove that a defendant entered a plea voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently if the court docket or minute order states that the plea was entered "knowingly, intelleigently and understaningly made". People v. Garcia (1979).
Convictions based on a plea of guilty must also be supported by a record of the plea that contains direct evidence that the accused was advised of the right to jury trial, to confront witnesses, and against self- incrimination, and that he or she "kowingly and intelligently" waived each of those three rights. The court record must also show that the defendant knew both the nature of the chanfe and the consequences of entering a plea of guilty. Boykin v. Alabama (1969), In re Tahl (1969).
The Boykin- Tahl rights are a powerful protection for defendants accused of crimes. These protections extend to defendants that are entering a plea of guilty or no contest.
To aid the defendant in reaching a decision regarding a plea agreement, defense counsel, after appropriate investigation, should advise the defendant of the alternatives available and of considerations deemed important by defense counsel or the defendant in reaching the decision. Before a person accussed of a crime can enter a plea of guilty or no contest in court before a judge, the judge must advise the defendant of the direct consequences of the plea. Bunnell v. Superior Court (1975). Judges ensure that a defendant understands what they are doing by making a defendant fill out a form with his or her attorney. If the defendant does not speak English then an interpreter will read the form to the defendant in his or her language. This form has several different names depending on the court and is referred to as a "change of plea form" or a "Tahl Form" or even an "advisement of rights form. The waiver of rights form essentially asks the defendant to intial away rights and disclosures of consequences of entering the plea to a conviction.
The court record must also reflect that the defendant is aware that the charge to which he or she is pleading guilty is a consitutionally valid charge. In re Tahl (1969).
According to the California Constitution an accused defendant unrepresented by counsel must be advised of and waive the right to counsel before entering a plea of guilty or no contest. Before the court must be satisfied that the defendant understands that he or she has the right to an attorney, and a defendant who does not wish to be represented by counsel must so state in open court. People v. Chadd (1981).
How is Habeas Corpus Motion Used?
Habeas corpus relief today is mostly used after a conviction on state or federal charges, as a way for prisoners to challenge the legality of the application of laws that resulted in detention. Habeas corpus is used in determining certain aspects of criminal cases, such as, whether there is an adequate basis for detaining a person? Whether the case should be moved to another type of court, state or federal? Whether bail or parole should be denied?
What is Habeas Corpus Relief?
How to get started in a Habeas Corpus Petition?
Many times a Habeas Corpus petition is a last ditch effort to help an individual that is facing deportation as a result of the conviction. In the context of an immigration action a habeas corpus petition can be used to vacate an unjust conviction. An immigrant seeking post conviction relief as a result of being placed in immigration proceedings must start the habeas corpus process with an investigation into the circumstances of the conviction. This would be the first step no matter if the non citizen defendant was convicted by plea of jury trial. Whether one was convicted by guilty or no contest plea or jury trial is a big distinction and can change the course of an investigation. For instance if the non citizen defendant was convicted by a plea then the circumstance of the plea are investigated. Just some of the questions that are raised are whether the non citizen's attorney advised appropriately about the immigration consequences of the plea. Another issue that can be investigated is whether the non citizen defendant had a knowing and intelligent understanding of the immigration consequences of the plea. If the defendant was convicted by jury trial then the circumstances of the jury trial must be examined. Regardless of how the conviction came about it is important that the first step be a thorough investigation into the circumstances of the case. Once a thorough investigation has been completed then a skilled attorney will be able to determine what the appropriate steps are to seek the requested post conviction relief.
The person petitioning for habeas corpus relief must be in custody when the petition is filed. Someone held in state custody must exhaust all state remedies including state appellate review before petitioning for habeas corpus relief in federal court.
Under California law, individuals in either actual or constructive custody may file a petition challenging the constitutionality of a conviction or sentence by filing a habeas corpus petition. Once a person is no longer in custody (i.e., they are no longer in jail or prison or on probation or parole), courts no longer have jurisdiction over a habeas petition. See People v. Picklesimer, 48 Cal. 4th 330 (party no longer in constructive custody may not file a write of habeas corpus); People v. Villa 45 Cal. 4th 1063 (2009).
A habeas corpus petition may be filed in the superior court , the court of appeal or the supreme court, but a petition filed in a reviewing court must state the petitioner's reasons for not filing in the superior court.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.