People v. Ramsay

204 N.Y.S.3d 364

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,

v.Keno RAMSAY, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Entered: February 2, 2024

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Thomas G. Leone, J.), rendered June 8, 2021. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

THOMAS L. PELYCH, HORNELL, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

BRITTANY GROME ANTONACCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, MONTOUR, OGDEN, AND DELCONTE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law § 205.25 [2]), defendant contends that his plea was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary because County Court failed to advise him that he could be subject to deportation if he pleaded guilty (see People v. Peqne, 22 N.Y.3d 168, 197, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617 [2013], cert denied 574 U.S. 840, 135 S.Ct. 90, 190 L.Ed.2d 75 [2014]) and due to his alleged mental illness. We conclude that defendant’s contentions are not preserved for our review (see People v. Reyes, 219 A.D.3d 1685, 1686, 195 N.Y.S.3d 845 [4th Dept. 2023]; People v. Smith, 198 A.D.3d 1347, 1348, 155 N.Y.S.3d 255 [4th Dept. 2021]). Under the circumstances of this case, the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine does not apply (see Reyes, 219 A.D.3d at 1686, 195 N.Y.S.3d 845; Smith, 198 A.D.3d at 1347, 155 N.Y.S.3d 255; People v. Ramirez, 180 A.D.3d 1378, 1379, 115 N.Y.S.3d 725 [4th Dept. 2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 973, 125 N.Y.S.3d 10, 148 N.E.3d 474 [2020]; cf. Peque, 22 N.Y.3d at 182-183, 980 N.Y.S.2d 280, 3 N.E.3d 617).

Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.