People v. Canela CA2/1

Filed 10/10/22 P. v. Canela CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE THE PEOPLE, B315246 Plaintiff and (Los Angeles County Respondent, Super. Ct. No. BA045520) v. PEDRO PRADO CANELA, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mildred Escobedo, Judge. Affirmed. Carlos Ramirez, 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, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Joseph P. Lee, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________________ Pedro Prado Canela pleaded guilty in 1992 to possession of cocaine in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350, subdivision (a). Canela filed a motion in 2019 under Penal Code section 1473.7 to vacate the 1992 conviction.1 The trial court denied Canela’s motion, and Canela did not appeal from the trial court’s order denying his motion. Canela filed a second motion under section 1473.7 in 2021. Citing Canela’s first motion having been heard on the merits and denied, the trial court dismissed Canela’s second motion. The People argue that Canela’s appeal from the second section 1473.7 motion is untimely and the appeal should be dismissed. We conclude that Canela has not demonstrated prejudice as a result of the asserted trial court error; we affirm. BACKGROUND Canela was charged in September 1991 with second degree robbery (§ 211) and possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). According to the trial court’s docket, which Canela attached to his first section 1473.7 motion, the trial court dismissed the robbery count and held Canela to answer for possession of cocaine. Canela was placed into a deferred entry of judgment program and placed on informal probation. Canela violated the terms of his deferred entry of judgment program, and in 1992 pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine. At his arraignment in 1991, the trial court advised Canela: “If you are not a citizen, you are hereby advised that a conviction of the offense for which you have been charged may have the consequences of deportation, exclusion from admission to the 1Further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. 2 United States, or denial of naturalization pursuant to the laws of the United States.” At the 1992 hearing where he pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine, the trial court told Canela: “If you’re not a citizen of the United States, pleading guilty to these two charges could very [sic] prevent you from becoming a citizen, get you deported. [¶] If you’re here lawfully but not as a citizen, that right could be taken from …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals