California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Landaverde, 20 Cal.App.5th 287, 228 Cal.Rptr.3d 862 (Cal. App. 2018):
People v. Villa (2009) 45 Cal.4th 1063, 90 Cal.Rptr.3d 344, 202 P.3d 427 did not deal directly with a timing issue characterized as "due diligence" but, rather, applied a limitation on relief that resulted indirectly from the passage of time. Villa 's holding is that section 1473, subdivision (a)'s, requirement that a person seeking habeas corpus be "unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of his or her liberty" renders habeas corpus unavailable to a defendant who has completed his or her state sentence but who is in federal immigration custody pending removal or other immigration proceedings. This, too, had the effect of placing a time-based limitation on the seeking of relief and created a substantial bar to challenging the effectiveness of counsel in immigration cases.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.