Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Dorcey Lovejoy, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-02-16
Citations: 136 A.D.3d 513
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dorcey Lovejoy, Appellant.
Judges: Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 136
Pages: 513–514

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dorcey Lovejoy, Appellant.
[24 NYS3d 902]—

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barbara F. Newman, J.), entered on or about June 11, 2014, which denied defendant's CPL 440.10 motion to vacate a 1999 judgment of conviction, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's claim that the court failed to advise him of the immigration consequences of his plea (see People v Peque, 22 NY3d 168 [2013], cert denied 574 US —, 135 S Ct 90 [2014]), is not properly raised in a CPL article 440.10 motion, because that claim would be "clear from the face of the record" (People v Llibre, 125 AD3d 422, 423 [1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 969 [2015]). While the remedy for a Peque error may involve a remand, upon the direct appeal, for fact-finding proceedings (22 NY3d at 200-201), that circumstance does not permit a record-based Peque claim to be raised on a CPL 440.10 motion (Llibre, 125 AD3d at 423).
Even if the statute permitted a record-based Peque claim to be raised in a CPL 440.10 motion, defendant's claim nonetheless would be unavailing. Although Peque is retroactive to cases pending on direct appeal (People v Brazil, 123 AD3d 466 [1st Dept 2014], lv denied 25 NY3d 1198 [2015]), there is no basis to extend retroactivity to collateral review of convictions that have become final (Llibre, 125 AD3d at 424).
Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.