Filed 8/28/20 P. v. Phi CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, G057400 consol. w/G057401 & G057402 v. (Super. Ct. No. C-94070, HUAN NGOC PHI, 15WF2622 & 15WF2829) Defendant and Appellant. OPINION Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Elizabeth G. Macias, Judge. Affirmed. Dawn S. Mortazavi, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Kristen J. Inberg, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * * Huan Ngoc Phi appeals an order denying his postjudgment motions under Penal Code section 1016.51 to vacate his 1992 convictions for several theft offenses. Phi contends the trial court abused its discretion in concluding the sentencing court in 1992 complied with its duty to advise him of the immigration consequences of the convictions when he pleaded guilty. (§ 1016.5, subd. (a).) We find no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm. I BACKGROUND A The Underlying Convictions In September 1992, pursuant to a plea deal in case number C-94070 (the 1992 case), Phi pleaded guilty to two counts of first degree robbery (§§ 211/212.5, subd. (a)) and two counts of receiving stolen property (§ 496.1 (now § 496, subd. (a)). Phi also admitted gang and firearm use enhancements (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1); § 12022, subd. (a)(1)). Facing a maximum prison term of 11 years and 4 months, Phi received a sentence of five years at the California Youth Authority. In December 2016, pursuant to a plea deal involving a “global disposition” of two cases (the 2016 cases), Phi pleaded guilty in case number 15WF2622 to two counts of possessing of a forged instrument over $950 (§ 475, subd. (a)) and four counts of misdemeanor identity theft (§ 530.5, subd. (c)(1)), and in case number 15WF2829 to one count of felony identity theft (§ 530.5, subd. (a)). Phi received a two-year prison sentence in one case, and a two-year prison sentence to be served concurrently in the other case. 1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 B. The Applications for Relief Under Section 1473.7 and Section 1016.5 1. The Motions In August 2018, Phi filed motions under section 1473.7 to vacate his convictions in all three cases. Section 1473.7 allows a person no longer in custody to bring a motion to vacate a conviction which “is legally invalid due to prejudicial error damaging the moving party’s ability to meaningfully understand, defend against, or knowingly accept the actual or potential adverse immigration consequences of a plea ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals