People v. Leyva CA4/3

DISCUSSION

In support of his motion, Leyva submitted a declaration in which he stated he was not advised by the trial court of the potential immigration consequences of his guilty plea. He also stated he was deported for the offenses to which he pled guilty and was currently residing in Mexico. Further, he stated that had he known he would be deported or there was a chance he would be deported, he would have taken the case to trial.

2 Leyva also submitted a declaration from an immigration attorney which stated the offenses to which Leyva pled guilty mandated deportation. Finally, Leyva provided a reporter’s transcript which indicates the trial court did not read the immigration advisement to him before accepting his guilty plea. To prevail on a motion to withdraw a plea under Penal Code section 1016.5, a defendant must establish: (1) the trial court failed to advise him as required; (2) there is more than a remote possibility that his conviction will have one or more of the specified adverse immigration consequences; and (3) had he been properly advised, he would not have pled guilty. (People v. Superior Court (Zamudio) (2000) 23 Cal.4th 183, 192, 199-200.) We review the trial…