The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Fuentes v. Clarke
No. 141890Supreme Court of Virginia
141890 Fuentes v. Clarke 10/29/2015 In an appeal from denial of an application for a writ of habeas corpus, it is held that the petitioner, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, was correctly advis…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
141890 Fuentes v. Clarke 10/29/2015 In an appeal from denial of an application for a writ of habeas corpus, it is held that the p…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- October 29, 2015
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
141890 Fuentes v. Clarke 10/29/2015 In an appeal from denial of an application for a writ of habeas corpus, it is held that the petitioner, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, was correctly advised by her counsel in conjunction with her prior plea of guilty to a charge of grand larceny in violation of Code § 18.2-95 that her conviction would likely result in her deportation, unless she found an exemption within the immigration system. The attorney had informed petitioner that he was not an immigration attorney and advised her to consult one, but his deportation advice was correct regardless of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of her presence in the United States. On the facts of…
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed; 1 such entry was left out of this case. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
Documents and links