Commonwealth v. Santana

Summary

The court vacated the denial of the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea and remanded for further proceedings because plea counsel's affidavit was not inherently inconsistent with counsel's plea-colloquy representation that immigration consequences had been discussed. The court held that the alleged inconsistency could not be resolved on the papers alone and that the defendant's submissions warranted further consideration of whether an evidentiary hearing was required. The court left the issues of the adequacy of counsel's advice and prejudice for the lower court to address on remand.