People v. Hernandezgonza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hernandezgonza

2016 NY Slip Op 8472, 145 A.D.3d 572, 41 N.Y.S.3d 891

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 15, 2016

Docket2509 1859N/14

StatusPublished

This text of 2016 NY Slip Op 8472 (People v. Hernandezgonza) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Hernandezgonza, 2016 NY Slip Op 8472, 145 A.D.3d 572, 41 N.Y.S.3d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura A. Ward, J.), rendered August 18, 2014, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted unlawful surveillance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant argues that his guilty plea was involuntary because the court failed to advise him of the possibility of deportation as a result of the plea (see People v Peque, 22 NY3d 168 [2013], cert denied 574 US —, 135 S Ct 90 [2014]). However, defendant has not established that the exception to the preservation rule applies, and we decline to review his claim in the interest of justice. The record demonstrates that defendant was made aware of the potential for deportation both before the plea and sentencing proceeding, and during that proceeding but before taking the plea. He thus had a practical ability to raise his claim (see id. at 182-183; People v Diakite, 135 AD3d 533 [1st Dept 2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1131 [2016]). As an alternative holding, we find that the court adequately warned defendant of the possibility of deportation before he took his plea (see Peque, 22 NY3d at 197).

Concur— Sweeny, J.R, Renwick, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Kapnick, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura A. Ward, J.), rendered August 18, 2014, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted unlawful surveillance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant argues that his guilty plea was involuntary because the court failed to advise him of the possibility of deportation as a result of the plea (see People v Peque, 22 NY3d 168 [2013], cert denied 574 US —, 135 S Ct 90 [2014]). However, defendant has not established that the exception to the preservation rule applies, and we decline to review his claim in the interest of justice. The record demonstrates that defendant was made aware of the potential for deportation both before the plea and sentencing proceeding, and during that proceeding but before taking the plea. He thus had a practical ability to raise his claim (see id. at 182-183; People v Diakite, 135 AD3d 533 [1st Dept 2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1131 [2016]). As an alternative holding, we find that the court adequately warned defendant of the possibility of deportation before he took his plea (see Peque, 22 NY3d at 197).

Concur— Sweeny, J.R, Renwick, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2016 NY Slip Op 8472, 145 A.D.3d 572, 41 N.Y.S.3d 891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hernandezgonza-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack