Opinion
04-13-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Hamadou BARRY, Defendant–Appellant.
Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Arthur H. Hopkirk of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jared Wolkowitz of counsel), for respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Arthur H. Hopkirk of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jared Wolkowitz of counsel), for respondent.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., RICHTER, MAZZARELLI, FEINMAN, GISCHE, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered April 11, 2013, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months, 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 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 and a suitable interpreter, several months before the guilty plea (see e.g. 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] ), giving defendant the opportunity to raise the issue, and rendering his claim unpreserved. We decline to review his claim in the interest of justice. In any event, we find it highly unlikely, given the terms and circumstances of the plea, that defendant could make the requisite showing of prejudice under Peque, 22 N.Y.3d 198–201, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617 (2013) if granted a hearing.