Opinion ID: 2524595
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: appellate review of the instant claim requires only a quick review of the transcript to ensure the court properly advised defendant

Text: Appellate review of claims like Resendiz's may therefore be limited. For a plea to be valid, the record must reveal the defendant was informed he could be deported as a consequence of his plea. On-the-record advisement is necessaryand sufficient. On-the-record advisement serves a dual purpose; it protects both the defendant and his plea. ( Boykin v. Alabama (1969) 395 U.S. 238, 244, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 ( Boykin) ; In re Tahl (1969) 1 Cal.3d 122, 132, 81 Cal.Rptr. 577, 460 P.2d 449.) Boykin prescribed on-the-record advisement of a defendant's constitutional rights to guarantee the plea was voluntary and knowing. On the one hand, on-the-record advisement ensured defendants did not plead guilty out of ignorance. On the other, [w]hen the judge discharges that function, he leaves a record adequate for any review that may be later sought ... and forestalls the spin-off of collateral proceedings that seek to probe murky memories. (Boykin, at p. 244, 89 S.Ct. 1709, fns. omitted, italics added.) Boykin advised courts to examine defendants to ensure they understand the nature of the charges, the constitutional rights being waived, and the permissible range of sentences, `[i]f these convictions are to be insulated from attack.' ( Id. at p. 244, fn. 7, quoting Commonwealth ex rel. West v. Rundle (1968) 428 Pa. 102, 237 A.2d 196, 197-198.) Determining the knowing nature of a plea is a simple[ ] task. ( People v. Allen (1999) 21 Cal.4th 424, 442, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 682, 981 P.2d 525.) Because on-the-record advisement is both necessary and sufficient, our evaluation of Boykin-Tahl challenges is minimal. [T]he record of the hearing ... should clearly demonstrate the defendant was told of his rights and that he affirmatively waived them.... [A] quick review of the transcript of the sentencing hearing may be all that is necessary. ( Allen, at p. 442, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 682, 981 P.2d 525.) Only in those unusual cases where no advisement precedes the plea will further investigation be necessary. ( Ibid. ) Review of section 1016.5 claims should be no broader in scope. The statutory preference for defendants to understand the possible collateral consequences of their pleas does not warrant more zealous protection than the constitutional imperative that defendants understand their constitutional rights and the direct consequences of their pleas. ( People v. Ramirez (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 519, 522, 83 Cal.Rptr.2d 882.) The record reflects Resendiz received correct advice regarding deportation; no further review is warranted. (Cf. People v. Allen, supra, 21 Cal.4th at p. 442, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 682, 981 P.2d 525.)