Judge Elisa Koenderman
Navas moved to vacate his judgment of conviction for burglary and criminal contempt. He argued ineffective assistance of counsel alleging his attorney erred in advising him that deportation was a likely, rather than mandatory, consequence of his conviction. Navas claimed that had he been apprised of the deportation inevitability, he would not have pleaded guilty, but insisted on going to trial. The court noted that Immigration and Customs Enforcement lodged a detainer against Navas that was pending on the date he entered the instant guilty pleas. Further, it found both counsel and the court informed Navas of the deportation consequences, noting he still wished to proceed with the plea. Also, the court stated Navas offered nothing but self-serving declarations to support his claim that his attorney misadvised him. It stated Navas' contention that counsel informed him deportation was likely, rather than mandatory was a "spurious attempt to avoid an anticipated consequence of his conviction by parsing words." The court found Navas' claim that he would have insisted on going to trial had he been told of the mandatory deportation consequences lacked credibility. Thus, Navas' motion to vacate his judgment of conviction was denied.
