Filed 5/2/23 P. v. Nahman CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE PEOPLE, B319838 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA076612) v. DAVID NAHMAN, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Gregory A. Dohi, Judge. Affirmed. Karyn H. Bucur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Viet H. Nguyen, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________________ Defendant and appellant David Nahman is a Canadian citizen. On June 4, 2014, a Los Angeles jury convicted him of (1) grand theft of personal property, namely a diamond necklace (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a)),1 with a true finding that the loss or damage exceeded $200,000, (2) second degree commercial burglary (§ 459), and (3) grand theft from a pawnbroker or second hand dealer (§ 484.1, subd. (a)), with a true finding that the loss or damage exceeded $950.2 He was sentenced to a term of five years in state prison. Following his successful appeal, the trial court resentenced defendant to county jail. (People v. Nahman (Feb. 18, 2016, B259175) [nonpub. opn.].) On December 19, 2019, defendant was released from jail. On January 13, 2020, he was placed in the custody of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He is currently awaiting removal proceedings. On March 10, 2020, defendant filed a motion to vacate his convictions pursuant to section 1016.5 and former section 1473.7 (the 2020 motion). The trial court denied his motion, and defendant timely appealed. On November 9, 2021, we dismissed his appeal from the denial of the 2020 motion without prejudice to him refiling a new motion in light of recent amendments to 1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 Defendant was also tried on charges for attempted murder and dissuading a witness by force or threat. The jury could not reach a verdict on these two counts. Defendant was later retried on those counts, and on May 28, 2019, the jury found him not guilty. 2 section 1473.7. (People v. Nahman (Nov. 9, 2021, B306988) [nonpub. opn.].) In accordance with our November 9, 2021, order, defendant refiled his motion to vacate his convictions pursuant to sections 1016.53 and 1473.7. The trial court denied his motion, and defendant timely appealed. We affirm the trial court’s order. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 22, 2022, after defendant’s appeal from the trial court’s order denying his 2020 motion was dismissed, defendant filed a new motion to vacate his …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals