Barragan's attorney, seeking a reduced sentence for his client, entered into plea negotiations with the prosecutor. He was specifically concerned about deportation. Subsequently, his attorney met with the prosecutor to discuss the likelihood of Barragan being deported if he pled guilty. During his guilty plea hearing, Barragan testified under oath that his attorney explained the plea agreement to him, including the number of days he would spend in jail, as well as the fine he would have to pay. And I explained to you that I was informed by the prosecuting attorney of some activity dealing with deportation.
District courts have broad discretion in deciding whether to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea.
In response, Barragan argues that withdrawal of his guilty plea is necessary to correct a manifest injustice because the prosecutor made misrepresentations to his attorney about the likelihood of Barragan being deported. The district court also concluded that Barragan was aware of the uncertainty of possible deportation proceedings. Finally, the district court concluded that the possibility that Barragan might be deported was a collateral consequence of his guilty plea. A review of the record satisfies us that the prosecutor in this case made no promise to Barragan about whether or not he would be deported. Indeed, because the prosecutor had no control over Barragan's deportation, no such promise could have been made.