Opinion
2007-997 S CR.
Decided December 2, 2009.
Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Glenn A. Murphy, J.), rendered March 29, 2007. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
PRESENT: TANENBAUM, J.P., MOLIA and IANNACCI, JJ.
Defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (Penal Law § 220.03) and received a sentence of a conditional discharge. At defendant's plea allocution, the District Court made no mention of any possible immigration consequences of defendant's plea. Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that this court should adopt a rule requiring that, before a trial court accepts a defendant's guilty plea to a misdemeanor offense, the court must advise the defendant of the possible deportation consequences of his conviction.
Contrary to defendant's contention, this court is not free to fashion such a rule. In People v Ford ( 86 NY2d 397), the Court of Appeals concluded that deportation is a collateral consequence of a conviction and that, therefore, a court has no duty to warn defendants of possible deportation consequences before entering a guilty plea ( see also People v Sanchez-Martinez, 35 AD3d 632; People v Villanueva, 255 AD2d 406). Therefore, as defendant raises no other objection to his plea and no other issue on appeal, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Tanenbaum, J.P., Molia and Iannacci, JJ., concur.