The United States Supreme Court overturned a ruling of the Kentucky Supreme Court, stating, “Because counsel must inform a client whether his plea carries a risk of deportation, Padilla has sufficiently alleged that his counsel was constitutionally deficient. Whether he is entitled to relief depends on whether he has been prejudiced, a matter not addressed here.” (Padilla v. Kentucky, 2010). Josè Padilla is a longtime legal resident of Kentucky and a Vietnam Veteran who never applied for U.S. citizenship. He pled guilty to drug-distribution charges and faced deportation. His attorney failed to inform him that his plea could easily be paired with automatic deportation, and eventually falsely claimed this his extensive residency in the U.S. would prohibit this from happening.  Padilla allegedly would not have entered a guilty plea and proceeded to trial if he was aware of the strong possibility of deportation. His case was brought before the Supreme Court of Kentucky alleging a Sixth Amendment infringement for the failure to have effective counsel; he was shot down. Fortunately the United States Supreme Court saw the importance of the matter and heard the case, overturning the Kentucky ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that deportation of a person living lawfully in the US is definitely a serious enough matter that when connected to a criminal plea it must be explained and understood by the defendant. Padilla’s lawyer was incorrect in his advice as the consequences of Padilla’s please could be read in the removal statute. If you are not a legal resident of Utah, or are lacking citizenship you should obtain the best lawyer possible when being charged in a criminal court so you will not receive poor legal advice and be taken advantage of as Josè Padilla was.