People v. Cesena CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 2022E076213California6,575 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

In 2017, defendant and appellant Jesus Armando Cesena pled guilty to one count

of possession for sale of a controlled substance. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.) In 2019,

he filed a motion pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1473.7 to withdraw his plea and vacate

his conviction on the grounds that his attorney failed to investigate the immigration

consequences of his plea, failed to inform him of the actual immigration consequences of

his plea, and failed to seek an immigration-safe plea. The trial court denied the motion.

Defendant appeals, contending his plea counsel provided ineffective assistance of

counsel. Specifically, he faults his counsel for failing to advise him of the specific

immigration consequences of his plea and for failing to negotiate a plea bargain with no

adverse immigration consequences. He also argues that he did not have a meaningful

understanding of the immigration consequences of his plea. In addition, defendant claims

the court failed to conduct a hearing pursuant to Penal Code section 1473.7 since it

prevented him from calling any witnesses, and it also erred by basing its denial, in part,

on the weight enhancement. (Health & Saf.…

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.