Filed 12/23/20 See Concurring Opinion CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, E072782 v. (Super.Ct.No. RIF75184) ESTEBAN ZARATE BRAVO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Jacqueline C. Jackson, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of Paul C. Supple, and Paul C. Supple, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Natasha Cortina and Melissa A. Mandel, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. 1 I INTRODUCTION On June 24, 1997, defendant Estaban Zarate Bravo pleaded guilty to and was convicted on a plea bargain agreement of: a felony violation of domestic violence (Pen. Code,1 §273.5, subd. (a); count 1) and felony violation of child cruelty (§ 273a, subd. (a); count 2). The trial court sentenced defendant to two years’ incarceration, suspended, and placed him on formal probation for 36 months on terms and conditions including 25 days’ custody, for which he was granted time served. On December 11, 2018, defendant filed a motion to vacate the judgment pursuant to sections 1016.5 and 1473.7. On March 19, 2019, the trial court denied the motion. Here, defendant contends that this court should grant the motion to vacate or, alternatively, remand to and direct the trial court to grant the motion. II FACTUAL BACKGROUND The record does not contain the facts underlying defendant’s pleas and convictions. This background will focus on what procedural facts can be gleaned from the record surrounding defendant’s claim that he was inadequately admonished as to the immigration consequences of his guilty plea during the plea bargain process, such that his plea agreement was not entered into willingly, intelligently, and voluntarily, to justify vacating the judgment. 1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 The felony complaint alleged that as to count 1, on June 7, 1997, defendant violated section 273.5, subdivision (a), by willfully and unlawfully inflicting a corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition upon Lucy D., who was defendant’s spouse; and, as to count 2, also on June 7, 1997, defendant violated section 273a, subdivision (a), by willfully and unlawfully, under circumstances and conditions likely to produce great bodily harm and death, cause and permit an infant, Esteban Jr., to suffer, and inflicted unjustifiable physical pain and mental suffering, and did willfully cause and permit the person and health of said infant to be injured. Defendant is a native of Mexico and Spanish is his first language. He appeared in custody at a hearing on June 24, 1997, at which he pleaded guilty to both counts with the use of an interpreter. He was admonished as to his rights, and initialed acknowledgment on a form provided therefor.2 These rights included the right to a speedy trial; to face and cross-examine witnesses; to ask the court to compel witnesses to attend trial; against self- incrimination; and to be represented ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals