People v. Snowden CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 26, 2024A168637California2,040 words

Opinion

Opinion

Streeter, J.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Snowden’s 2023 Petition In April 2023, Snowden, representing himself, filed his petition. He alleged that on March 28, 2023, he discovered through due diligence that his 2001 guilty pleas for violating Health and Safety Code section 11351, possession of a controlled substance for sale, and Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (c),1 being armed with a firearm (the latter an admission of a sentence enhancement allegation), were procured through a misrepresentation. He further contended that in 2001, first, he either “was never advised of” his Boykin-Tahl rights2 or was not advised of them until after he entered his guilty plea, and that the record of his waiver of his rights was “ ‘woefully inadequate,’ ”; second, the court either failed to advise him or did not advise him until after he entered his guilty plea of the direct consequences of his plea and the nature of the charges against him; third, the court failed to find a factual basis for his plea; and, fourth, his attorney did not advise him that his admission of a gang enhancement allegation could be charged as a strike in future cases. Snowden attached to his 2023 petition a declaration by his attorney in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.