Orozco

People v. Orozco

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 3d 646·180 Cal. App. 4th 1279·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 7
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 8, 2010F056712California2,038 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vartabedian, J.

Defendant Daniel Rodriguez Orozco entered a no contest plea to one count of second degree murder and admitted a firearm enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022.5) and a gang enhancement (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). As part of his plea bargain, he agreed to what was characterized as an all-encompassing waiver of appellate rights, including any challenges based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Although the form he executed was entitled “Waiver of Appellate Rights,” it included waiver of the right to bring a motion to withdraw his plea. At the time of sentencing, defendant requested a continuance to retain private counsel and sought to bring a motion to withdraw his plea, which could include a challenge of the effectiveness of his counsel. His request was denied because the trial court determined he waived such rights at the time of his plea. Defendant claims the trial court erred in failing to consider his motions. We reverse, finding a defendant cannot be found to have waived his presentence right in the trial court to challenge the effectiveness of his counsel when the claimed ineffectiveness relates to the advice he received at the time he entered the plea…

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.