Crimmigration Defense for Non-Citizens
For non-citizens, the sentence is only half the story — a plea that looks harmless can trigger deportation, denial of naturalization or inadmissibility. We build defense strategies around your immigration status from day one.
The immigration consequence can outweigh the sentence
For a non-citizen, the punishment handed down in the courtroom is often the smaller problem. A short probation or a modest fine that a citizen would shrug off can, for you, mean deportation, being barred from ever returning, or losing your path to a green card or citizenship. The criminal case and the immigration case are decided under different laws — and the immigration side can be permanent. Any defense has to weigh both, because the plea that ends the criminal case quickly may be the one that ends your life in the United States.
Moral turpitude and aggravated felonies: immigration labels are not Texas labels
Immigration law does not simply follow the Texas name for an offense. Federal law sorts crimes into its own categories — “crimes involving moral turpitude” and “aggravated felonies” — and those labels do not line up with the state penal code. An offense that Texas calls a misdemeanor can be an aggravated felony for immigration purposes, and a charge that sounds minor can still involve moral turpitude. Because the classification is federal, the analysis has to be done against the immigration statutes and case law, not just the Texas charge you are facing.
A dismissal or deferred adjudication can still be a conviction
This is where many non-citizens are caught off guard. Under federal immigration law, a “conviction” includes a plea of guilty or no contest paired with any penalty or restraint on liberty — and Texas deferred adjudication typically qualifies, even though the state case may later be dismissed. So the resolution that protects a citizen’s record can still count against you in immigration court. Whether a particular disposition counts depends on how it is structured, which is exactly why the plea cannot be negotiated in a vacuum.
The Padilla duty — never plead without immigration-aware counsel
In Padilla v. Kentucky, the U.S. Supreme Court held that defense counsel has a constitutional duty to advise a non-citizen about the immigration consequences of a plea. That advisal is not a formality; it means the immigration analysis has to happen before you decide, not after the damage is done. A non-citizen should never enter a plea without counsel who understands both the criminal case and how it reads under immigration law. We treat that analysis as a required step in every case, not an afterthought.
Your status shapes a coordinated defense
Where you stand in the immigration system changes what is at risk and what the defense should protect. A lawful permanent resident is guarding a green card and a future citizenship application; a visa holder can lose the ability to stay or reenter; a DACA recipient has protections that certain offenses can strip away; and someone who is undocumented faces different exposure again, including ICE holds and detainers. As a former prosecutor, Ray Hindieh knows how the State builds its case — and he coordinates the criminal defense around your status so that resolving the charge does not quietly cost you the ability to remain in the country.