Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rumaldo DELACRUZ, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Juan M. Merchan, J.), rendered January 3, 2012, as amended January 17, 2017, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 41/212 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant has not established that the narrow exception to the preservation requirement applies to his Peque claim (see People v. Peque, 22 N.Y.3d 168, 182–183, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617 [2013], cert denied Thomas v. New York, 574 U.S. ––––, 135 S.Ct. 90, 190 L.Ed.2d 75 [2014] ). Defendant was informed of his potential deportation by a notice of immigration consequences that the People served upon him, in the presence of his attorney, at arraignment, months before his guilty plea, giving him the opportunity to raise the issue, and rendering his claim unpreserved (see e. g. People v. Barry, 149 A.D.3d 494, 52 N.Y.S.3d 323 [1st Dept. 2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 1123, 64 N.Y.S.3d 673, 86 N.E.3d 565 [2017]; People v. Diakite, 135 A.D.3d 533, 24 N.Y.S.3d 584 [1st Dept. 2016], lv denied 27 N.Y.3d 1131, 39 N.Y.S.3d 113, 61 N.E.3d 512 [2016] ). Moreover, the court discussed defendant's deportation at the plea proceeding. We decline to review his claim in the interest of justice.
Defendant claims that his counsel provided him with ineffective assistance regarding the immigration consequences of his plea (see Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 [2010] ). The record only reflects the fact that the attorney gave him some advice about the immigration consequences, not the content of the advice given (compare People v. Doumbia, 153 A.D.3d 1139, 60 N.Y.S.3d 157 [1st Dept. 2017][content of actual advice given on the record] ). Because this claim involves matters not reflected in, or fully explained by, the record, it is unreviewable without the benefit of a fuller record generated by way of a CPL 440.10 motion (see People v. Pastor, 28 N.Y.3d 1089, 1091, 45 N.Y.S.3d 317, 68 N.E.3d 42 [2016]; Peque, 22 N.Y.3d at 202–203, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 7533
Decided: November 01, 2018
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)