IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 17-1318 Filed August 1, 2018 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EDUARDO CANO, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Joel A. Dalrymple (motion for revocation of deferred judgment) and Bradley J. Harris (guilty plea), Judges. Eduardo Cano appeals after pleading guilty to assault with intent to commit serious injury. AFFIRMED. Rockne O. Cole of Cole Law Firm, P.C., Iowa City, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Darrel Mullins, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ. 2 DOYLE, Judge. Eduardo Cano appeals after pleading guilty to assault with intent to commit serious injury, asserting a claim of ineffective assistance for counsel’s failure to advise him of certain immigration consequences of his plea. Upon our review, we affirm his conviction, judgment, and sentence, and we preserve his claim for possible postconviction-relief proceedings to allow the record to be developed. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. In February 2016, the State filed a criminal complaint alleging Eduardo Cano willfully caused bodily injury to another, in violation of Iowa Code section 708.4(2) (2016), a class “D” felony. Cano was appointed counsel. In April 2017, Cano entered a written guilty plea to the lesser-included offense of assault with intent to inflict serious injury, in violation of section 708.2(1), an aggravated misdemeanor. Among other things, the guilty plea form, signed by Cano and his attorney, stated, “I understand that my conviction for the crime or crimes in this guilty plea may result in adverse immigration consequences, including deportation, if I am not a citizen of the United States.” Cano also waived his rights to be present in court for the entry of his guilty plea and for his sentencing. The court accepted his plea, and the judgment was deferred. A month later, an appearance by privately-retained counsel was filed on Cano’s behalf. At the same time, Cano filed an application for interlocutory review of the grant of his deferred judgment. His application stated: “What would ordinarily be a fantastic result for a US Citizen, has resulted in drastic adverse immigration consequences for [Cano]. He now sits in detention and faces the loss of his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals due to the deferred judgment that was granted . . . .” He also filed a motion 3 in district court to withdraw consent on request for a deferred judgment. The Iowa Supreme Court denied his request for interlocutory appeal and directed the district court “to hold a hearing and enter a ruling on [Cano’s] pending motion to withdraw his consent to the deferred judgment.” Thereafter, the district court set a hearing on Cano’s motion. Cano then filed a motion in arrest of judgment. Later, he filed a “Defendant’s Consent to Revocation of Probation” wherein he consented to having his deferred judgment revoked. In a motion to reset the hearing, Cano stated the parties had agreed that his probation should be revoked. At the hearing, the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals