Bad Plea Advice Cost Her Everything — Court Reversed It
What if you already served your sentence and only then learned your lawyer's advice was wrong — and that you are now facing deportation? That is exactly what happened to Mara Morillo. In October 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the vacating of her drug conviction after finding her attorney told her she could "work out" her immigration status after pleading guilty — advice that was flat-out wrong and made her immediately deportable.
Mara Morillo came to the United States from Venezuela and Colombia in 1996 on a travel visa, which she later overstayed. She eventually settled in Massachusetts, had two U.S.-citizen children, and had lived in the country for nearly two decades. When federal drug charges were filed against her in New Hampshire, her court-appointed Federal Public Defender told her something that changed her life: if she took the plea deal, she would do some time in prison but could "work out" her immigration situation afterward. She believed him. She pled guilty.
What her lawyer got wrong — and what the court found
The plea agreement itself said she "may be removed." The judge at the plea hearing said the conviction "could result in immigration consequences that may include deportation." But the reality was far harsher: her conviction made her immediately and presumptively removable and permanently inadmissible to the United States. There is a legal difference between "may" and "will," and Morillo's attorney never explained it. Under Padilla v. Kentucky (2010), a Supreme Court ruling that requires defense lawyers to advise non-citizen clients about deportation consequences before they plead guilty, that failure is a constitutional violation. In August 2021, after completing both her prison sentence and supervised release, Morillo received a Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Administrative Removal Order — a formal step toward deportation. Certain it was a mistake, she tried to reach her original lawyer. He did not respond. She eventually hired new counsel in February 2025 and filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis — a rare legal tool that lets someone who has already finished their sentence challenge a conviction in court.
Immigration Deadlines 2026 — Free
Download PDF with all key dates
The district court held an evidentiary hearing. Morillo's daughter and a family friend testified that Morillo had repeatedly spoken about her plan to fix her immigration status after release — corroborating that she genuinely believed her lawyer's assurances. Her original attorney testified that he had "no specific recollection" of Morillo or the advice he gave her. The district court granted the writ and vacated her conviction. The government appealed. On October 16, 2026, a three-judge panel of the First Circuit — Judges Gelpí, Thompson, and Dunlap — affirmed. The court found that Morillo had justified her delay in seeking relief, that her lawyer's advice was constitutionally deficient, and that she would not have pled guilty had she known the truth. The government itself conceded that her conviction carried ongoing consequences: mandatory removal and permanent inadmissibility.
Why this ruling matters for immigrants in removal proceedings
This case is a reminder that a lawyer's reassurance — even from a court-appointed public defender — is not always legally accurate. Under Padilla, your defense attorney is required to tell you clearly if a guilty plea will make deportation virtually certain. If they fail to do so, and you can show you would have fought the case instead of pleading guilty, you may have grounds to challenge the conviction even years later. The coram nobis writ is an extraordinary remedy, meaning courts grant it rarely. But Morillo's case shows it is available when the error is fundamental and the person is no longer in custody to use other legal tools like a habeas petition.
What to do
- If you are a non-citizen who pled guilty to any crime and your lawyer never clearly explained the deportation consequences, speak with an immigration attorney immediately — even if you have already served your sentence.
- Ask an attorney whether your conviction qualifies as an "aggravated felony" or a "crime involving moral turpitude" under immigration law — these categories trigger the harshest removal consequences and are often misunderstood by criminal defense lawyers.
- Gather any evidence that shows what your lawyer told you before you pled guilty: text messages, letters, notes, or witnesses who heard those conversations. This evidence is critical for a coram nobis petition.
- If you have already received a removal order or a Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Administrative Removal Order, do not ignore it — contact an immigration lawyer right away, as deadlines to respond are short.
A full breakdown of this topic — in our guide “Appealing to the BIA”.
Fishkin Law Firm, New York
Under Padilla v. Kentucky, defense counsel has a constitutional duty to advise non-citizen clients that a guilty plea will make deportation "presumptively mandatory" when the law is clear — a vague warning that consequences "may" follow is not enough. If you received that kind of watered-down advice and would have gone to trial had you known the truth, a coram nobis petition is worth exploring even years after your sentence ended. The window is not unlimited, so consult an immigration attorney who also handles post-conviction relief as soon as possible.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a writ of coram nobis and who can use it?
A writ of coram nobis is a rare court order that lets someone challenge a criminal conviction after they have already finished their sentence and are no longer in custody. It is used when a fundamental error — like bad legal advice about deportation — affected the outcome of the case. Because it is an extraordinary remedy, courts grant it only in limited circumstances.
My lawyer told me deportation was just a possibility, not a certainty. Was that wrong?
It may have been. Under the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Padilla v. Kentucky, if immigration law makes deportation virtually certain after a guilty plea, your lawyer was required to tell you that clearly — not just say it 'might' happen. A vague warning is not enough. An immigration attorney can review your case and tell you whether the advice you received met the legal standard.
Can I challenge my conviction if I already served my sentence and was deported?
Possibly. The coram nobis writ exists precisely for people who are no longer in custody and cannot use other tools like a habeas petition. The Morillo case shows courts will consider petitions filed years after sentencing if the person can explain the delay and show the error was serious. You should consult an attorney to evaluate your specific situation.
What evidence do I need to prove my lawyer gave me bad immigration advice?
You need to show what your lawyer actually told you and that you would have made a different decision — likely going to trial — if you had known the truth. Useful evidence includes your own sworn statement, testimony from family or friends who heard your lawyer's advice, letters or messages from your attorney, and any documents from your criminal case. The stronger and more specific your evidence, the better.