Filed 12/9/21 P. v. Kim CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B309035 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA402937) v. HYO KUN KIM, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mildred Escobedo, Judge. Reversed with directions. Christopher Lionel Haberman, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr. and Steven D. Mathews, Supervising Deputies Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _______________________ Hyo Kun Kim appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion under Penal Code sections 1016.5 and 1473.7 to vacate his 2013 conviction for assault with a deadly weapon.1 Kim has been a legal permanent resident of the United States since 1979. But his conviction subjects him to mandatory deportation to South Korea. At the time of his no contest plea, Kim expressed confusion about the immigration consequences of his plea. The court’s response suggested Kim might be able to avoid deportation. Plus, Kim suffered from psychosis, had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and was taking anti-psychotic and mood stabilizing medications. We reverse. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. The Underlying Offense On September 17, 2012, Kim entered a coffee shop and asked for free coffee. The owner obliged. Kim asked for a loan, which the owner refused. The owner asked the security guard to ask Kim to leave. Kim refused. The security guard, feeling threatened, pepper-sprayed Kim and attempted to handcuff him. A struggle ensued, and Kim cut the security guard’s hand with a knife. The cut required approximately 20 stitches.2 The People charged Kim with one count of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) and alleged he inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 Facts taken from the probation officer’s preconviction report. 2 B. Kim’s Plea and Conviction On February 7, 2013, the day of trial, defense counsel told the trial court that Kim wanted to change his plea to the charge in an open plea to the court.3 The court told Kim if he pleaded to the charge, the court would sentence him to two years, given his lack of criminal record and “some unusual circumstances.” The People had offered Kim a plea agreement for three years, striking the great bodily injury enhancement. The court began by addressing the immigration consequences of the plea, noting they were a concern of Kim’s. The court explained, “[I]f you’re found guilty or no contest, you …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals