Guilty plea vacated for failure to advise of correct term of license suspension

In People v. Castellini (App. Term. 1st Dept. 7/14/2009), the First Appellate Term reversed and vacated a defendant's guilty plea because the court incorrectly advised the defendant about one of the consequences of her license suspension.  The court stated that her license would be suspended for 90 days; in fact, the required length was one year.  "While in some jurisdictions the loss of a driver's license 'result[s] from the actions taken by agencies the court does not control,' and thus is considered a collateral consequence (People v Ford, 86 NY2d at 403, citing Moore v Hinton, 513 F2d 781 [5th Cir 1975]), the license sanction here involved constituted punishment directly imposed by the court as a result of defendant's guilty plea (see Penal Law § 1193[2][a], [b]), and was thus a direct consequence of the plea. The court's error is not subject to harmless error analysis (see People v Hill, 9 NY3d [*2]189, 192 [2007], cert denied __ US __ 128 S Ct 2430 [2008]), and renders the plea invalid."  (LC)