Soriano

People v. Soriano

Bad Law
194 Cal. App. 3d 1470·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 2147·240 Cal. Rptr. 328·65 A.L.R. 4th 705
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 1987Docket Nos. A035242, A038232California4,511 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rouse, J.

Defendant Danilo Soriano appeals from denial by the superior court of his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. Defendant sought to withdraw his guilty plea to one count of assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)) and an admission that he had personally used a firearm in committing the offense (§ 12022.5). Defendant’s writ petition alleged that he had received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because counsel failed to advise him adequately of the deportation consequences of his guilty plea.

Also before us is defendant’s original petition for a writ of habeas corpus, likewise based on his claim of ineffective assistance. We confine our discussion of the facts to those which are necessarily involved in the resolution of issues raised on appeal.

On February 3, 1985, defendant was charged by complaint with one count of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)) and with a personal firearm use enhancement (§ 12022.5). An attorney from the office of the San Francisco Public Defender was appointed to represent defendant. Defendant pleaded not guilty.

Pursuant to a plea bargain, defendant made his first guilty plea on February 22, 1985, but…

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.