Civil Implications of Criminal Pleas Seminar

• Jurisdiction: United States,Federal
• Citation: Vol. 22 No. 02
• Publication year: 2018
• Year: 2018
• topic: Civil Procedure

Civil Implications of Criminal Pleas Seminar

by Carol K. Muranaka

In early August 2017, Bill Harrison gave a thought-provoking presentation on the "Civil Implications of Criminal Pleas."¹

"Our bar license means we are licensed to practice," he said, "as an attorney, counselor and solicitor." See Haw. Sup. Ct. R. 1.6.

In Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010), the United States Supreme Court held that counsel must provide affirmative, competent advice to clients about the risk of all penalties connected with the criminal charges or potential pleas. Jose Padilla was a lawful permanent resident of the United States for more than 40 years. He pleaded guilty to the transportation of a large amount of marijuana in his tractor-trailer in Kentucky. The question on appeal was whether, as a matter of federal law, Padilla's counsel had an obligation to advise Padilla that if he pled guilty to the offense that it would result in a deportation. The Court agreed with him that constitutionally competent counsel would have advised him that his conviction for drug distribution made him subject to automatic deportation.

The Supreme Court found that the relevant immigration statute was "succinct, clear, and explicit" in defining the removal consequence for Padilla's conviction. Id. at 368. Padilla's attorney provided him false assurance that he would not be deported if he pled guilty and that was incorrect.

Types of pleas

Hawaii Rules of Penal Procedure 11 provides that a defendant may plead not guilty, guilty, or no contest. In federal court, before the court accepts a guilty plea or nolo contendere, the defendant is placed under oath. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b). That is not the case in state court.

The defendant does not admit guilt in a no contest plea. Usually the defendant and the state will enter into a stipulation of facts. The plea must be knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made. Haw. R. Penal P. 11.

Hawaii Rules of Penal Procedure 11(f)(4) prevents pleas from being used in any civil or penal proceeding against the defendant. The Rule provides as follows:

(4) Inadmissibility of Plea Discussion. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, evidence of a plea of guilty, later withdrawn, or of a plea of no contest or of an offer to plead guilty or no contest to the offense charged or any other offense, or of statements made in connection with and relevant to, any of the foregoing pleas or offers, is not admissible in any civil or penal proceeding against the person who made the plea or offer.

However, statements made in connection with the plea are admissible in a criminal case for perjury or false statement—if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel. Haw. R. Penal P. 11(f)(4).

Moreover, Hawaii Rules of Evidence 410 (Haw. Rev. Stat., Chap. 626) provides the inadmissibility of pleas, plea discussions, and related statements:

Except as otherwise provided in this rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions:
(1) A plea of guilty which was later withdrawn;
(2) A plea of nolo contendere;
(3) Any statement made in

...