Placencia

Francisco Placencia appeals the denial of his motion to vacate the judgment following a plea of nolo contendere to possession or control of child pornography. (Pen. Code, § 311.11, subd. (a).) 1 He contends the trial court erred by not adequately advising him of the immigration consequences of his plea as required by section 1016.5. 2 We conclude that the motion *492 constitutes an attack on the validity of a plea, and an appeal from the denial of the motion requires the defendant to obtain a certificate of probable cause from the trial court in compliance with section 1237.5. Because Placencia did not obtain a certificate of probable cause, we dismiss the appeal.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Police discovered Placencia had transmitted through his e-mail a photograph showing a four-year-old female child with her mouth over an adult male’s erect penis. Placencia admitted he had received and transmitted many DVD’s showing children in the nude and in sexual poses. One of his DVD’s contained approximately 50 photographs of female children in provocative poses and various levels of undress.

In September 2008, Placencia was charged with exhibiting a minor in pornography (§…