P. v. Delgado CA5

Filed 8/1/13 P. v. Delgado CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F065262

v. (Super. Ct. No. CF95542510)

CAMILO CANDELARIO DELGADO, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. D. Tyler Tharpe, Judge. Roger D. Wilson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Leanne Le Mon, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Detjen, J.

The trial court denied appellant Camilo Candelario Delgado’s motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1016.51 to vacate his 1995 conviction for grand theft (§ 487, subd. (c)). On appeal, Delgado contends: 1) the court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to vacate; 2) the trial court abused its discretion when it considered unknown, uncharged crimes when it sentenced him on his 1995 grand theft conviction; and 3) he should be allowed to withdraw his plea because he did not receive the benefit of his 1995 plea bargain. We affirm. FACTS On October 5, 1995, Delgado pled guilty to grand theft. Prior to entering his plea Delgado filled out a change of plea form. On the form he initialed item 10 which provided, “I understand that if I am not a citizen of the United States a plea of Guilty or No Contest could result in deportation, exclusion from admission to this country, and/or denial of naturalization.” He also signed an acknowledgment on the form that, in pertinent part, stated he understood its contents. The form also was signed by an interpreter who asserted he or she had been duly sworn and had translated the change of plea form and “all the questions therein” to Spanish for Delgado, that Delgado indicated he understood the contents of the form, and that Delgado initialed and signed the form. Defense counsel signed an acknowledgement on the form that he personally “read and explained” each item on the form to Delgado. During the change of plea hearing the following colloquy occurred: