People v. Pedraza

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department unanimously affirmed the denial of Eugenia Pedraza’s CPL 440.10 motion to vacate her 2002 judgment of conviction. The court held that her ineffective-assistance claim based on counsel’s failure to negotiate an immigration-favorable plea was speculative and that, because her conviction predated Padilla v. Kentucky, the alleged failure to advise her of immigration consequences was not a cognizable basis for relief.

Holdings

1. The motion court properly denied the claim without a hearing because the claim was speculative and the submitted evidence failed to establish a reasonable probability that the People would have made an immigration-favorable plea offer.
2. Because defendant's conviction became final before Padilla v. Kentucky, the alleged failure to advise her of adverse immigration consequences was not a cognizable basis under either the United States or New York Constitutions for vacatur or a hearing.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Supreme Court properly denied, without a hearing, defendant's CPL 440.10 claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to negotiate an immigration-favorable plea.
2. Whether defendant could obtain vacatur or a hearing based on counsel's alleged failure to advise her of the adverse immigration consequences of her plea when her conviction became final before Padilla v. Kentucky.

Disposition

affirmed