Judges

Attorneys and Parties

Brief Summary

Background

In 2017, Omarny Williams, a lawful permanent resident and citizen of Jamaica, pleaded guilty to first-degree robbery in full satisfaction of a Queens County indictment in exchange for a promised sentence of eight years in prison plus five years of postrelease supervision. During the plea colloquy, the court asked whether he was a United States citizen, and he answered yes. The court gave no warning that, if he were not a citizen, the plea could lead to deportation, as required by People v Peque. In 2022, the Department of Homeland Security began removal proceedings based on the robbery conviction. Williams then moved under CPL 440.10 and, in effect, CPL 440.20, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel concerning immigration advice and youthful offender advocacy, the court's failure to warn him of immigration consequences, and the court's failure to properly assess youthful offender eligibility.

Lower Court Decision

After a hearing, the Supreme Court found that trial counsel had been effective, but nevertheless vacated the judgment because the court had failed to advise Williams of the possible immigration consequences of his plea. The court also set aside the sentence after concluding that the sentencing judge had improperly determined that Williams was not eligible for youthful offender treatment. On reargument, the court adhered to that ruling.

Appellate Division Reversal

The Appellate Division modified the order by denying the CPL 440.10 branch of the motion. It held that the Peque-based claim was fully apparent from the plea record and thus was reviewable on direct appeal; because Williams did not show a justifiable reason for failing to appeal, CPL 440.10(2)(c) [requires denial when sufficient facts appear on the record to permit appellate review but no appeal was taken without justification] barred collateral relief. The court also held that the claim was not a mixed ineffective-assistance claim that would permit CPL article 440 review. However, the Appellate Division affirmed the portion of the order that effectively granted CPL 440.20 relief, because the sentencing court incorrectly concluded Williams was not an eligible youth. Under CPL 720.10(2)(b) [defines when a youth is disqualified from youthful offender eligibility based on a prior felony conviction and sentence], a prior felony plea without sentencing did not make him ineligible. The matter was remitted for resentencing and a proper youthful offender determination under CPL 720.20(1) [requires the court to make a youthful offender determination in every eligible case].

Legal Significance

The decision reinforces two important rules in New York criminal practice. First, a claim that the plea court failed to give the deportation warning required by People v Peque must be raised on direct appeal when the alleged error appears on the face of the plea record; it generally cannot be repackaged as a CPL 440.10 claim. Second, sentencing courts must independently and correctly determine youthful offender eligibility in every eligible case, even if the defendant does not request it or pleaded guilty pursuant to an agreement. A prior felony plea alone is not enough to disqualify a youth; there must have been a prior felony conviction and sentence.