People v. Ogunmowo, 232 Cal. Rptr. 3d 529

Ogunmowo (Nigerian native) became a lawful permanent resident in 1988 and pleaded guilty in 1989 to possession for sale of cocaine in exchange for a two-year term.
His trial counsel, Jerry Kaplan, told him (without researching) that as a lawful permanent resident he would not face immigration consequences from the plea; Kaplan now concedes that advice was incorrect.
The immigration service initiated removal proceedings in 2004 based on the 1989 conviction. Ogunmowo later sought relief under the newly enacted Penal Code §1473.7 (effective 2017), which permits vacation of convictions when counsel’s errors impaired a defendant’s ability to understand immigration consequences.
Ogunmowo filed a §1473.7 motion (2017) supported by his declaration and Kaplan’s affidavit; the trial court denied relief, finding no prejudice and noting the court had given a standard immigration advisement at the plea.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal reviewed de novo the ineffective-assistance claim and held Kaplan’s affirmative misadvice was objectively deficient and that Ogunmowo established prejudice (he would have declined the plea to avoid deportation). The order denying relief was reversed and the matter remanded to allow withdrawal of the plea.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel's affirmative misadvice about immigration consequences rendered the 1989 conviction legally invalid under §1473.7 (ineffective assistance + prejudice)	Kaplan misadvised Ogunmowo that as an LPR he would not face immigration consequences; Ogunmowo relied on that advice and would have gone to trial to avoid deportation	County/trial court: defendant waited long; court gave standard §1016.5 advisement at plea; counsel's statement did not materially affect plea decision	Court held counsel's performance was deficient (affirmative, unresearched misadvice) and Ogunmowo was prejudiced (reasonable probability he would have rejected plea to avoid deportation). Reversed and remanded to permit withdrawal of plea.

Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (counsel must advise regarding deportation risk)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance + prejudice)
Lee v. U.S., 137 S. Ct. 1958 (defendant can show prejudice by showing he would have rejected plea to avoid deportation)
In re Resendiz, 25 Cal.4th 230 (ineffective-assistance claims present mixed question reviewed independently; counsel advisals vs. court advisals)
People v. Landaverde, 20 Cal.App.5th 287 (§1473.7 relief framework and its application)
People v. Aguilar, 227 Cal.App.4th 60 (court §1016.5 advisement does not preclude an ineffective assistance claim based on counsel's misadvice)