Edgar Zafiro-Guillen v. The People of the State of Colorado

Petitioner Edgar Zafiro-Guillen pled guilty to possession of one gram or less of a

schedule II controlled substance in exchange for a two-year deferred judgment. In 2009,

upon successful completion of the conditions of the deferred judgment, his plea was

withdrawn and the case was dismissed with prejudice pursuant to section 18-1.3-102(2),

C.R.S. (2016).

¶2 In 2013, Zafiro-Guillen filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea pursuant to

Crim. P. 32(d), alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied the

motion, holding it lacked jurisdiction. The court of appeals affirmed.

People v. Zafiro-Guillen, No. 14CA534, slip op. at 1–5 (Colo. App. Mar. 19, 2015).

¶3 We granted Zafiro-Guillen’s petition for certiorari and now affirm. For the

reasons more fully articulated in People v. Corrales-Castro, 2017 CO 60, ___ P.3d ___,

the lead case we decide today,1 we conclude that the plain language of Crim. P. 32(d)

requires that a “plea” exist in order for it to be “withdraw[n].” Therefore, there is

nothing in the Rule that would authorize a district court to withdraw an already

withdrawn plea. Because Zafiro-Guillen’s plea had already been withdrawn and the

case dismissed with prejudice pursuant to section 18-1.3-102(2), there was no plea to be

withdrawn pursuant to Rule 32(d). Accordingly, we affirm the court of appeals.

I.

¶4 In April 2007, Zafiro-Guillen pled guilty to possession of one gram or less of a

schedule II controlled substance in exchange for a two-year deferred judgment. In 1 In addition to Corrales-Castro, we also decide the companion cases of Espino-Paez v. People, 2017 CO 61, ___ P.3d ___; Flores-Heredia v. People, 2017 CO 64, ___ P.3d ___; and People v. Roman, 2017 CO 63, ___ P.3d ___.





3

April 2009, upon successful completion of the terms of the deferred judgment, the

district court withdrew Zafiro-Guillen’s guilty plea and dismissed the case with

prejudice.

¶5 In 2013, Zafiro-Guillen filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea pursuant to

Crim. P. 32(d), alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied his

motion, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction because Zafiro-Guillen’s plea had already

been withdrawn and his case had been dismissed with prejudice. The court of appeals

affirmed. Zafiro-Guillen, slip op. at 1. We granted certiorari and now affirm.2