From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ramnaraine

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2012
92 A.D.3d 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-02-14

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Vidyanand RAMNARAINE, appellant.

The Mirvis Law Firm, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Tony Mirvis of counsel), for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Drake A. Colley of counsel), for respondent.


The Mirvis Law Firm, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Tony Mirvis of counsel), for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Drake A. Colley of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), rendered August 2, 2010, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the County Court, Schenectady County (Cortese, J.), upon a finding that he violated a condition *466 thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of assault in the second degree.

ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that his admission to violating the conditions of his probation was not voluntary because the Supreme Court failed to advise him about the deportation consequences of his admission ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Vasquez, 85 A.D.3d 1068, 925 N.Y.S.2d 863; People v. Decker, 83 A.D.3d 731, 732, 919 N.Y.S.2d 880). In any event, the Supreme Court's failure to advise the defendant of the possible deportation consequences of admitting to a probation violation did not render his admission involuntary ( see CPL 220.50[7]; People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 403, 633 N.Y.S.2d 270, 657 N.E.2d 265; People v. Romero, 82 A.D.3d 1013, 918 N.Y.S.2d 730; cf. Padilla v. Kentucky, ––– U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284).

The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel rests on matter dehors the record, which cannot be reviewed on direct appeal ( see People v. Rohlehr, 87 A.D.3d 603, 927 N.Y.S.2d 919; People v. Griffith, 78 A.D.3d 1194, 1196, 913 N.Y.S.2d 264; People v. Wiedmer, 71 A.D.3d 1067, 896 N.Y.S.2d 686).

SKELOS, J.P., DICKERSON, HALL, ROMAN and COHEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ramnaraine

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2012
92 A.D.3d 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

People v. Ramnaraine

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Vidyanand RAMNARAINE, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Feb 14, 2012

Citations

92 A.D.3d 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1285
938 N.Y.S.2d 465

Citing Cases

People v. Drammeh

People v. Peque Sicajan, 19 N.Y.3d 977, 950 N.Y.S.2d 360, 973 N.E.2d 770;People v. Griffith, 78 A.D.3d 1194,…

People v. Soria

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claims that the plea of guilty was not knowingly,…