Matt Krygiel Kentucky Attorney General’s Office

advertisement

Bowling Green native Matt Krygiel has spent a career in law, and Tuesday will find one of his cases being heard by the highest court in the land.

Krygiel, 36, now residing in Lexington and working in the criminal appeals division of the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office, will travel to Washington, D.C., next week to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.

A member of the initial 1991 graduating class of Greenwood High School and a Western Kentucky University graduate, Krygiel said that the distinction represents a “once in a lifetime opportunity” for him and that he could recall only three other attorneys in his division, all recent retirees after 30-year careers, who had cases reviewed by the high court.

“It’s incredibly difficult to get a case in the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Krygiel, who studied law at the University of Kentucky. “It is pretty much a once in 30-year opportunity as you go through this career.”

The case involves Jose Padilla, a native of Honduras who has been a legal U.S. resident for nearly 40 years, who was convicted in Hardin County on a drug-related felony, a charge that makes him eligible for deportation.

Padilla has claimed that his attorney provided ineffective representation, alleging that when he asked his attorney how the conviction would affect his residency, he was advised that he should not be concerned since he has lived in the U.S. for so long.

The state’s position is that a criminal defense attorney is obligated only to advise a client of the direct consequences of a guilty plea, such as the length of any incarceration and the amount of any fine. Collateral consequences, such as deportation, are not part of the advice that a defense attorney is obligated under the Constitution to provide, and the state argues that incorrect advice given by an attorney regarding collateral consequences should not make a difference in that regard.

Learning the ropes locally

While studying at WKU, Krygiel began his career in law at the Bowling Green firm of Harned, Bachert and Denton, doing the menial tasks of a runner.

“I did the grunt work of copying, filing, picking up dry cleaning, you name it,” Krygiel said.

While there, however, he took an interest in criminal and family law, crediting attorney Joy Denton with pushing him in that direction and giving him an idea of the day-to-day work of an attorney.

After graduating from law school, Krygiel returned to Bowling Green and found work as a clerk for Warren County Family Court Judge Margaret Huddleston when the family court system was just beginning in Warren County.

It was in family court that Krygiel got a first-hand look at the crucible that can be the legal system.

“It’s funny, but being in the context of family court and criminal court, you automatically think that criminal court has the most at stake, but ... in family court, emotions run so high and it’s so personal and there’s usually so much history and animosity among both parties that nobody walks out happy, nobody gets exactly what they want,” Krygiel said. “People are not going to be happy with your decision, and you’re stuck with that.”

Krygiel credits Huddleston with having the most influence on his career, as he saw the then-new judge deal with the unique experiences of family court.

Krygiel then moved on to family court in Franklin County before moving to Charleston, S.C., where his wife, Ashley, then a medical student, got a pharmacy residency.

Krygiel spent his time in South Carolina as a researcher at a Charleston law firm until he and his wife moved back to Kentucky - Ashley working as a resident at University of Kentucky Hospital and Matt going to work for the Franklin County Attorney before entering his current job at the Attorney General’s office.

Months of preparation

Krygiel is co-counsel on the case with Robert Long, who will be doing the oral argument before the Supreme Court; Krygiel’s main role in the case involves lots of research.

“We’ve been working on this thing pretty much since February,” Krygiel said. “We’ve had to become as much as possible experts on a lot of immigration law ... just getting a sort of national perspective on the state of the law everywhere. In cases like this, you have to give the Supreme Court an idea of what all the states do.”

When the time comes to actually take the case before the high court, the state will have 20 minutes to offer an oral argument.

Krygiel will have what he describes as “the best seat in the house,” though court protocol requires him to move over and sit in Long’s seat when Long stands up to deliver his argument.

This past week, Long and Krygiel traveled to Washington, D.C., to do a mock hearing of the case organized by the National Association of Attorneys General.

During the mock hearing, attorneys in the nation’s capital who have had their cases heard before the Supreme Court posed as justices, peppering the attorneys with questions about their case.

Krygiel’s father-in-law, Joe Survant of Bowling Green, said he and Krygiel talk regularly, though the upcoming case rarely comes up in discussions.

“It seems like whenever we’re together there’s so much going on we can’t really discuss it in depth,” Survant said.

On another recent visit to Washington, Krygiel was one of a group of attorneys who listened to oral arguments in the opening week of the Supreme Court’s term, and came away with a clearer idea of how potentially daunting the courtroom can be.

“I’m just amazed to be there, to be going next week and sitting at the counsel table,” Krygiel said. “The most overwhelming thing is how close you are to (the justices). They’re about five feet in front of you, the bench is curved and you’re staring up at nine people and you know who they are and what they stand for.”