People v. Pineda CA2/1

Filed 10/29/25 P. v. Pineda CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B338142

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA264727) v.

JORGE DEL CARMEN PINEDA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Larry P. Fidler, Judge. Affirmed. Erin J. Radekin for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill and Steven D. Matthews, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Jorge Del Carmen Pineda appeals from an order denying a Penal Code section 1473.71 motion to vacate an aggravated felony conviction to which he pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement. Section 1473.7, subdivision (a)(1) permits “[a] person who[, like Pineda] is no longer in criminal custody [to] file a motion to vacate a conviction” on the basis that the person did not “meaningfully understand . . . or knowingly accept the actual or potential adverse immigration consequences of [the] conviction,” resulting in “prejudicial error” that renders the conviction “legal[ly] invalid.” (§ 1473.7, subd. (a)(1).) We agree with the trial court that Pineda failed to meet his burden of proving he did not understand the immigration consequences of his plea. Accordingly, we need not consider whether he was prejudiced. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2001, police found Pineda in possession of 175 kilograms of cocaine and 2,699 pounds of marijuana. In January 2011,2 a criminal information charged Pineda with transportation of a controlled substance (see Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)) and alleged the amount of the controlled substance exceeded 80 kilograms, making him subject to a 30-year prison sentence. In May 2011, pursuant to a plea agreement, the district attorney amended the information to allege the amount of cocaine