People v. Delarossa

57 A.D.3d 559, 867 N.Y.2d 700

Opinion

The defendant’s claim that the Supreme Court misadvised him concerning the immigration consequences of his plea is without merit (see CPL 220.50 [7]; cf. People v Argueta, 46 AD3d 46, 51 [2007]). The defendant’s claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to negotiate a plea to a crime that would not have constituted an “aggravated felony” under federal law (8 USC § 1101 [a] [43] [B]) rests largely on matter dehors the record and, to that extent, it cannot be reviewed (see People v Madrid, 52 AD3d 532, 533 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 790 [2008]; People v Drago, 50 AD3d 920 [2008]). To the extent that the claim can be reviewed on the record, counsel provided the defendant with meaningful representation (see People v Browning, 44 AD3d 1067, 1067-1068 [2007]; People v Rodriguez, 32 AD3d 481, 482 [2006]; People v Reels, 17 AD3d 488, 489 [2005]). Fisher, J.E, Balkin, McCarthy and Leventhal, JJ., concur.