People v. Navarro-Gutierrez CA3

Filed 1/15/26 P. v. Navarro-Gutierrez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Sutter) ----

THE PEOPLE, C102725

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF11- 0000144-01) v.

AMADOR NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Amador Navarro-Gutierrez appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to vacate his convictions for selling or transporting methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)). Defendant contends he did not meaningfully understand the convictions would result in his deportation from the United States and, had he known, defendant would not have pleaded no contest to the charges. We affirm the judgment.

FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS

2011 Conviction

In January 2011, the People charged defendant with four counts of selling or transporting methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a) [counts 1-4]) and

1

one count of possessing methamphetamine for the purpose of sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378, subd. (a) [count 5]). Related to counts 4 and 5, the People alleged the methamphetamine in each charge exceeded four kilograms by weight or 100 liters by liquid volume. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11370.4, subd. (b)(2)). In May 2011, defendant pleaded no contest to counts 1-4 and admitted the methamphetamine in count four exceeded four kilograms by weight or 100 liters by liquid volume. In exchange for his plea, the People moved to dismiss count 5 and strike the remaining enhancement; the trial court granted the People’s motion. The parties agreed defendant would be sentenced to 11 years in state prison. There is no reporter’s transcript of the plea; however, in his written plea agreement, among other things, defendant acknowledged the immigration consequences of his plea: “I understand that if I am not a citizen of the United States, I will be deported from the country, denied citizenship, and denied re-entry into the United States.” Defendant indicated that he offered his “plea of guilty or no contest freely and voluntarily and with full understanding of everything in this form.” Defendant executed a statement in the written plea agreement, which said: “I have read or have had read to me this form and have initialed each of the items that applies to my case. If I have an attorney, I have discussed each item with my attorney. By putting my initials next to the items in this form, I am indicating that I understand and agree with what is stated in each item that I have initialed. The nature of the charges, possible defenses, and the effects of any prior convictions, enhancements, and special allegations have been explained to me. I understand each of the rights outlined above, and I give up each of them to enter my plea.” Defendant’s counsel also executed a statement in the written plea agreement, which said: “I am the attorney for the defendant. I reviewed this form with my client. I have explained each of the items in the form, including the defendant’s constitutional and statutory rights. I have answered all the defendant’s questions with regard to those rights,