In People v. Ibanez (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 537, defendant Ibanez asserted that the "'fact unknown to the trial court at the time of the defendant's guilty plea was that the defendant did not know he faced the potential of civil commitment under the SVPA the Sexually Violent Predators Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, 6600 et seq.),'" and that "'if the fact of his ignorance of the potential consequence had been made known to the court, the court would not have entered the judgment, at least without advising him of the potential consequence.'" (Id. at pp. 545-546.) The appellate court concluded: "Defendant mischaracterizes what constituted the previously unknown fact in this case. The error in this case did not involve facts or evidence but instead concerned a legal issue. Defendant's ignorance regarding the potential for civil commitment under the SVPA is a legal, not a factual, question." (Id. at p. 546.)