From the District of South Carolina comes another decision holding that Padilla is a “new rule” as per Teague v. Lane and therefore cannot be applied retroactively. The case is Dennis v. United State, Case No. 08-CR-889-JFA (D.S.C. Apr. 19, 2011) and the petitioner there challenged his conviction by way of a Section 2255 habeas petition. To support its “new rule” holding, the Dennis court relied primarily on its finding that Padilla was the not “dictated” by prior precedent at the time it was decided — a conclusion that at first blush might appear correct but with greater reflection is deeply flawed.
The decision can be downloaded here.