Filed 4/16/21 P. v. Bohmwald CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN THE PEOPLE, B300743 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA068801) v. LINDSAY BOHMWALD, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura L. Laesecke, Judge. Affirmed. Sarvenaz Bahar, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Matthew Rodriguez, Acting Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Rama R. Maline, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. INTRODUCTION In 2006 Lindsay Bohmwald, a native of Venezuela, pleaded no contest to grand theft of access card information, a violation of Penal Code section 484e, subdivision (d).1 Twelve years later, in 2018, Bohmwald filed a motion under section 1473.7 to vacate her conviction and withdraw her plea. Bohmwald argued her attorney in 2006 did not inform her of the immigration consequences of her plea, which “damage[ed] her ability to understand or defend against the adverse immigration consequences of her plea.” The superior court denied the motion. The court ruled Bohmwald did not meet her burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence she was entitled to relief under section 1473.7. Bohmwald appeals, contending the court applied an incorrect legal standard, failed to make a finding on whether her attorney in 2006 properly advised her, and erred in concluding she did not satisfy the requirements of the statute. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. 2006: Bohmwald Pleads No Contest to a Felony In 2006 police arrested Bohmwald for driving a stolen car and having in her possession checks that did not belong to her. The People charged Bohmwald with receiving or concealing stolen property, in violation of section 496, subdivision (a), and acquiring or retaining possession of access card account 1 Statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 information of another person with the intent to use it fraudulently, in violation of section 484e, subdivision (d).2 At an early disposition hearing, Bohmwald’s attorney informed the court that Bohmwald wanted to plead no contest to violating section 484e, subdivision (d). The prosecutor stated the terms of the plea agreement: The court would place Bohmwald on formal probation for three years, and Bohmwald would perform 60 days of community service and receive credit for the time she had served in custody. Before the court accepted Bohmwald’s plea, the prosecutor confirmed with her that she wanted to proceed with her plea and asked Bohmwald a series of questions. The prosecutor asked Bohmwald if she had …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals