AB 1352, as amended, Eggman. Deferred entry of judgment: withdrawal of plea.
Existing law allows judgment to be deferred with respect to a defendant who is charged with certain crimes involving possession of controlled substances and who meets certain criteria, including that he or she has no prior convictions for any offense involving controlled substances and has had no felony convictions within the 5 years prior, as specified. Existing law prohibits the record pertaining to an arrest resulting in successful completion of a deferred entry of judgment program from being used in any way that could result in the denial of employment, benefit, license, or certificate.
This bill would require a court to allow a defendant who was granted deferred entry of judgment on or afterbegin delete January 1, 1997, after pleading guilty or nolo contendere to the charged offenseend deletebegin insert
January 1, 1997, who has performed satisfactorily during the period in which deferred entry of judgment was granted, and for whom the criminal charge or charges were dismissed, as specifiedend insert, to withdraw his or her plea and enter a plea of not guilty, and would require the court to dismiss the complaint or information against thebegin delete defendant, if the defendant performed satisfactorily during the deferred entry of judgment period and the defendant attests that the plea may result in the denial or loss to the defendant of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate, including, but not limited to, causing a noncitizen defendant to potentially be found inadmissable, deportable, or subject to any other kind of adverse immigration consequence. The bill would require the Judicial Council to develop a form to allow the defendant to make this attestation. Pursuant to the bill, the completion, signing, and submission of the form with specified documentation would be presumed to satisfy the
requirement for the withdrawal of the plea and dismissal of the complaint.end deletebegin insert defendant. If court records showing the case resolution are no longer available, the bill would require that the defendant’s declaration, under penalty of perjury, that the charges were dismissed after he or she completed the requirements, be presumed to be true.end insertbegin insert By expanding the application of the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.end insert
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
end insertbegin insertThis bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
end insertVote: majority.
Appropriation: no.
Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: begin deleteno end deletebegin insertyesend insert.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1203.43 is added to the Penal Code, to
2read:
(a) (1) The Legislature finds and declares that the
4statement in Section 1000.4, that “successful completion of a
5deferred entry of judgment program shall not, without the
6defendant’s consent, be used in any way that could result in the
7denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate”
8constitutes misinformation about the actual consequences of
9making a plea in the case of some defendants, including all
10noncitizen defendants, because the disposition of the case may
P3 1cause adverse consequences, including adverse immigration
2consequences.
3(2) Accordingly, the Legislature finds and declares that based
4on this misinformation and the
potential harm, the defendant’s
5prior plea is invalid.
6(b) In any case in which a defendant was granted deferred entry
7of judgment on or after January 1, 1997, after pleading guilty or
8nolo contendere to the charged offense, the defendant shall be
9permitted by the court to withdraw the plea of guilty or nolo
10contendere and enter a plea of not guilty, and thereafter the court
11shall dismiss the complaint or information against the defendant,
12if the defendant attests to both of the following:
13(1) The charges were dismissed after the defendant performed
14satisfactorily during the deferred entry of judgment
period.
15(2) The plea of guilty or nolo contendere may result in the denial
16or loss to the defendant of any employment, benefit, license, or
17certificate, including, but not limited to, causing a noncitizen
18defendant to potentially be found inadmissable, deportable, or
19subject to any other kind of adverse immigration consequence.
20(c) The Judicial Council shall, by June 1, 2016, develop a form
21that allows a defendant to attest to the information described in
22paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b).
23(d) The defendant shall submit documentation of the dismissal
24of charges or satisfactory participation in, or completion of,
25
diversion programming. The completion, signing, and submission
26by the defendant of the form described in subdivision (c) with the
27documentation specified in this subdivision shall be presumed to
28satisfy the requirements for withdrawal of the plea and dismissal
29of the complaint or information against the defendant.
30(b) For the above-specified reason, in any case in which a
31defendant was granted deferred entry of judgment on or after
32January 1, 1997, has performed satisfactorily during the period
33in which deferred entry of judgment was granted, and for whom
34the criminal charge or charges were dismissed pursuant to Section
351000.3, the court shall, upon request of the defendant, permit the
36defendant to withdraw the plea of guilty or nolo contendere and
37enter a plea of not guilty, and the
court shall dismiss the complaint
38or information against the defendant. If court records showing the
39case resolution are no longer available, the defendant’s
40declaration, under penalty of perjury, that the charges were
P4 1dismissed after he or she completed the requirements for deferred
2entry of judgment, shall be presumed to be true.
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
4Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
5the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
6district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
7infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
8for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of
9the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within
10the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
11Constitution.
O
96