Filed 6/17/21 P. v. Longoria CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT THE PEOPLE, F079267 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15CR-00301) v. AUDON SOTO LONGORIA, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Merced County. David W. Moranda, Judge. Law Offices of Michael Poole and Michael Poole for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra and Rob Bonta, Attorneys General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Darren K. Indermill, David Andrew Eldridge, and Kari Ricci Mueller, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- On May 16, 2014, Audon Soto Longoria, with the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter, pled guilty to felony assault likely to produce great bodily injury ` (Pen. Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(4)). The factual basis for the plea was confirmed in open court. While under the influence of alcohol, Longoria placed his hands around the neck of his girlfriend, pregnant with their expected child, limiting her ability to breathe. In lieu of a possible four-year prison term, Longoria was sentenced to 36 months of probation, with 180 days in custody, and two counts under section 11377, subdivision (a), and section 243, subdivision (e)(1) were dismissed. In 2017, the Board of Immigration Appeals determined felony assault is a crime involving moral turpitude and subjects an individual to deportation. On that basis, Longoria moved pursuant to section 1473.7 to vacate his guilty plea and argued he did not know the conviction “provided serious immigration consequences.” The trial court2 denied Longoria’s motion to vacate, finding Longoria had not met his burden of proof and otherwise understood the immigration consequences. We affirm. BACKGROUND At the change of plea hearing, the court informed Longoria, “With respect to the consequences of a guilty or no contest plea, you need to know this: If you’re not now a citizen of the United States, this conviction can and will result in your deportation, a denial of your right to citizenship in the future by way of naturalization, and a denial of your right to reenter the United States.” Longoria affirmatively acknowledged the warning and subsequently pled guilty to felony assault (§ 245, subd. (a)(4). In a written section 1473.7 motion to vacate, Longoria argued he “did not meaningfully understand the immigration consequences of []his plea and his attorney did not defend against the serious immigration consequences because[,] at the time of his plea, the law was not clear” felony assault was a deportable offense. He also claimed his 1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2The conviction occurred in Santa Cruz County. The motion to vacate was heard in …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals