United States v. Mathur, No. 11-6747 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
The issue presented in this appeal was whether the right recognized in "Padilla v. Kentucky," (130 S. Ct. 1473, 1486 (2010)) is a new right that has been made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review so as to enable Defendant-Appellant Shahzad Mathur to file a timely motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to vacate his guilty plea for drug trafficking. When Defendant, an alien residing in the United States, pled guilty in 2007 to conspiracy to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine in 2008 and received a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment, his lawyer failed to advise him of the immigration-related consequences of his plea, such as possible deportation, telling him "not to worry" about such consequences. After pleading guilty, however, the Department of Homeland Security initiated deportation proceedings against Defendant based on his plea. Almost three years after his conviction, the Supreme Court handed down Padilla, and relying on that decision, Defendant filed a section 2255 motion seeking to vacate his plea. The district court denied Defendant's motion, finding it untimely. It concluded that Padilla was not to be applied retroactively to cases on collateral review. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding that Defendant's 2255 motion was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in 2255(f).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.