People v. Haffiz

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Citation976 N.E.2d 216,951 N.Y.S.2d 690,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04376,19 N.Y.3d 883
Decision Date07 June 2012
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Feoid HAFFIZ, Appellant.

19 N.Y.3d 883
976 N.E.2d 216
951 N.Y.S.2d 690
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04376

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Feoid HAFFIZ, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

June 7, 2012.



[951 N.Y.S.2d 690]Quadrino & Schwartz, P.C., Garden City (Bruce A. Barket of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead (Michael Blakey of counsel), for respondent.


[19 N.Y.3d 884]OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

On March 6, 2008, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, criminal sale of a firearm in the third degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. Two months later, defendant,

[976 N.E.2d 217]

[951 N.Y.S.2d 691]with new defense counsel, moved to withdraw the plea arguing, among other things, that the defense of entrapment had been established and he was innocent as a matter of law Relying on our decision in People v. McDonald, 1 N.Y.3d 109, 769 N.Y.S.2d 781, 802 N.E.2d 131 (2003), defendant also claimed that his defense counsel at the time of the plea was ineffective by misinforming him that “sometimes people are not deported” after a criminal conviction, when, in fact, defendant's felony conviction resulted in mandatory deportation. County Court denied defendant's motion, finding that defendant's allegations of innocence were contradicted by the plea allocution. The court did not address defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

On appeal to the Appellate Division, defendant further argued that his plea should be vacated pursuant to the then-recent decision Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010). In Padilla, the United States Supreme Court recognized that “deportation is a particularly severe penalty” with a “close connection to the criminal process,” and held that constitutionally effective assistance of counsel requires defense counsel to inform his or her client whether a plea carries the risk of deportation (559 U.S. at ––––, 130 S.Ct. at 1481–1482, 1484, 1486 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of defendant's motion (77 A.D.3d 767, 909 N.Y.S.2d 490 [2d Dept.2010] ).

We agree with the Appellate Division that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his plea. “The established rule is that a guilty plea will be upheld as valid if it was entered voluntarily, knowingly...

To continue reading

Request your trial
96 practice notes
  • People v. Lantigua, Ind. 7466/98
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • April 30, 2020
    ...counsel to advise a defendant whether a plea carries the risk of deportation ( id. at 367–369, 130 S.Ct. 1473 ; see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 884, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012] ). Whether a defendant is entitled to relief on his claim will depend upon whether he can satisfy......
  • People v. Murray, 2017–08647
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 13, 2019
    ...event, the transcript of the plea proceeding demonstrates that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 884, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 ; People v. Hickson, 165 A.D.3d 1166, 85 N.Y.S.3d 546 ; People v. Odom, 164 A.D.3d 1475, 1476, 83 N.Y.S......
  • People v. Peque
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • November 19, 2013
    ...ineffective assistance of counsel to develop a record sufficient to allow appellate review of their claims ( see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 885, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012];People v. McLean, 15 N.Y.3d 117, 121, 905 N.Y.S.2d 536, 931 N.E.2d 520 [2010] ). Where a defendant's......
  • People v. Gomez, 11570
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 13, 2020
    ...by filing a CPL 440.10 motion, and his failure to file a postjudgment motion renders his claim unreviewable"]; see also People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 885, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012] ).186 A.D.3d 426 We do not agree with defendant's attempt to exempt himself from the necessit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
99 cases
  • People v. Lantigua, Ind. 7466/98
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • April 30, 2020
    ...counsel to advise a defendant whether a plea carries the risk of deportation ( id. at 367–369, 130 S.Ct. 1473 ; see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 884, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012] ). Whether a defendant is entitled to relief on his claim will depend upon whether he can satisfy......
  • People v. Murray, 2017–08647
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 13, 2019
    ...event, the transcript of the plea proceeding demonstrates that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 884, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 ; People v. Hickson, 165 A.D.3d 1166, 85 N.Y.S.3d 546 ; People v. Odom, 164 A.D.3d 1475, 1476, 83 N.Y.S......
  • People v. Peque
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • November 19, 2013
    ...ineffective assistance of counsel to develop a record sufficient to allow appellate review of their claims ( see People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 885, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012];People v. McLean, 15 N.Y.3d 117, 121, 905 N.Y.S.2d 536, 931 N.E.2d 520 [2010] ). Where a defendant's......
  • People v. Gomez, 11570
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 13, 2020
    ...by filing a CPL 440.10 motion, and his failure to file a postjudgment motion renders his claim unreviewable"]; see also People v. Haffiz, 19 N.Y.3d 883, 885, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 [2012] ).186 A.D.3d 426 We do not agree with defendant's attempt to exempt himself from the necessit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT