P.

FACTS

On May 13, 2009, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detained

Cifuentes and initiated removal proceedings against him. In preparation for his defense,

2 Cifuentes contacted an immigration attorney who told him an immigration judge lacks

authority to pardon a defendant in a removal proceeding if the defendant was convicted

of an aggravated felony. Thus, the immigration judge lacked authority to pardon

Cifuentes because Cifuentes pleaded guilty to count 2, an aggravated felony, in 1997.

However, if Cifuentes pleaded guilty to count 1, a nonaggravated felony, instead of

count 2, he would be in a better position to obtain relief from immigration removal.

DISCUSSION

I

THE COURT'S ORDER IS VOID FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Resolution of this case is made difficult because of the confused nature of the

proceedings. Although the People opposed Cifuentes's first motion they ultimately

negotiated a new plea agreement under which Cifuentes could withdraw his plea to

count 2, on the condition that he plead to count 1, a more serious, strike offense. The

court accepted the new plea bargain, even though the original plea was in 1997, count

had long been…