P. v. Litonjua
After pleading nolo contendere to possession of a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378)[1], defendant Raul Litonjua, Jr., was placed on probation for three years. He was subsequently taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Defendant then filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel failed to advise him of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea. The trial court denied the motion. Defendant filed a notice of appeal challenging the validity of his plea and claiming that the court erred in hearing the motion to withdraw his plea over defense counsel’s objection. Defendant also filed a request for certificate of probable cause, which the court granted.
On appeal, defendant contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) because his trial counsel failed to advise him of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea.[2] We affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Litonjua