1. The Circuit Court did not err in denying Nguyen's Petition without a hearing. Nguyen relies on the Hawai‘i Supreme Court's decision in State v. Sorino, 108 Hawai‘i 162, 118 P.3d 645 (2005). In that case, Sorino moved to withdraw his no contest plea after the Immigration and Naturalization Service served him with a notice to appear at removal proceedings.
This case is therefore unlike those in other states in which trial courts have erred by not sufficiently specifying the possible immigration consequence as required by law. See State v. Sorino, 108 Hawai‘i 162, 118 P.3d 645, 651 (2005) (holding that warning that “this plea may have a bearing on whatever relationship you have with the Immigration and Naturalization Service” completely failed to specify consequences of plea as required by statute); Machado v. State, 839 A.2d 509, 510, 513 (R.I.2003) (per curiam) (holding that warning that plea might have “some effect upon what happens with the immigration service” was inadequate because court did not identify specific consequences required by statute). ¶ 11. Defendant also contends that the court should have informed him that he is subject to automatic denial of citizenship, which he describes as a “direct consequence” of his plea.
The supreme court held that Sorino's no contest plea was invalid because the Circuit Court's advisement regarding the immigration consequences of Sorino's plea had been inadequate. State v. Sorino, 108 Hawai'i 162, 167-69, 118 P.3d 645, 649-52 (2005). The supreme court issued its decision concerning Sorino's no contest plea to the terroristic threatening charge in Cr. No. 98-0347 five months after this court had affirmed Sorino's felon-in-possession convictions in Cr. No. 00-1-1728.