People v. Ceja CA3

Filed 5/1/25 P. v. Ceja CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Tehama) ----

THE PEOPLE, C101469

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. NCR89726)

v.

JOEL GERSOM CEJA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Joel Gersom Ceja appeals from the trial court’s denial of his 1 postjudgment motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1473.7. His counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record and determine whether there are arguable issues on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Defendant was advised by counsel of his right to file a

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. More than 30 days have elapsed, and defendant has not filed a supplemental brief. Although this is not defendant’s first appeal as of right, in the interest of judicial economy, we exercise our discretion to independently review the record. (See People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 233, fn. 6 (Delgadillo).) Having done so, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. The trial court’s order denying the section 1473.7 motion is affirmed. I. BACKGROUND In 2014, the People charged defendant with possession of marijuana for the purpose of sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359) and transportation of marijuana (id., § 11360, subd. (a)). Defendant ultimately pled no contest to possession of marijuana for the purpose of sale. On his written plea form, defendant initialed next to the following statement titled “Immigration Consequences”: “I understand that if I am not a citizen of the United States, my plea of guilty or no contest may or, with certain offenses, will result in my deportation, exclusion from reentry to the United States, and denial of naturalization and amnesty and that the appropriate consulate may be informed of my conviction. The offenses that will result in such immigration action include, but are not limited to, an aggravated felony, conspiracy, a controlled substance offense, a firearm offense, and, under certain circumstances, a moral turpitude offense.” Defendant also initialed next to the statement that “[b]efore entering this plea, I have had a full opportunity to discuss the following with my attorney: [¶] . . . [¶] The consequences of this plea, including the immigration consequences.” During the plea colloquy, the trial court said to defendant, “if you are not a citizen of this country, by entry of your plea today and conviction herein it could result in your deportation, denial of re-admission to this country or affect your ability to become a naturalized citizen. [¶] Do you understand that?” Defendant responded, “Yes, sir.” The court found that the plea was free, knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and that defendant understood the nature and