P.

P. v. Barrera CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 6, 2013B238326California1,763 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

On October 9, 1990, in Los Angeles Superior Court case No. VA005274, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of second degree burglary, in violation of Penal Code section 459.1 The standard plea form, i.e., the Tahl2 form, included a paragraph which listed the immigration consequences of a plea. It provided: “I understand that if I am not a citizen of the United States, the conviction for the offense charged may have the consequences of deportation, exclusion from admission to the United States, or denial of naturalization pursuant to the laws of the United States.” Defendant declared by his signature at the end of the document he understood “each and every one” of his constitutional rights and desired to waive those rights to plead guilty, and he had “personally initialed each of the above boxes and discussed them with [his] attorney.” Defendant was represented by attorney Arnold W. Lieman. Lieman declared, “I have explained each of the above rights to the defendant, and having explored the facts with him/her and studied his/her possible defenses to the charge(s), I concur in his/her decision to waive the above rights and to enter a plea of guilty.” Before accepting the…

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.