P. v. Vasquez CA2/8
In 2019, appellant Alvaro Alexis Vasquez filed a motion to vacate his 2005 conviction for robbery, as he was currently facing deportation proceedings due to the conviction. He claimed he did not understand the adverse immigration consequences of pleading no contest in 2005 because he was not a “fluent English speaker” and did not have a Spanish interpreter present at the hearings. The trial court denied the motion without prejudice.
In 2020, appellant filed his second motion to vacate the 2005 conviction. He claimed to have new evidence in support of his motion. After argument, the trial court found appellant’s new evidence was insufficient, and denied the second motion with prejudice. Appellant appeals from the order denying his second motion.
We find appellant’s arguments unavailing and affirm the trial court’s order.
Comments on P. v. Vasquez CA2/8