The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) criticized the Manhattan District Attorney's Office on Mar. 27 for offering a six-month plea deal to Nicol Alexandra Contreras-Suarez, who admitted to raping a 14-year-old in February 2025.
The case has drawn attention because of the nature of the crime and concerns about how criminal cases involving non-citizens are handled. DHS officials said the sentence was too lenient for such a serious offense.
Contreras-Suarez was initially charged with first-degree rape of a child under age 17 and stalking. The plea agreement reduced his sentence to six months in jail with time served after he pleaded guilty. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had lodged an immigration detainer with Manhattan Central Booking on February 13, 2025, and Contreras-Suarez is currently being held at Rikers Island. The New York City Department of Corrections agreed to honor ICE’s detainer and not release him into the community.
Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis said, “This plea deal is a disgrace. Six months in jail for raping a child is a gross miscarriage of justice. This pervert was let into our country by the Biden administration and then again released from jail following his arrests for armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, and prostitution.” Bis continued, “The horror story of Contreras-Suarez illustrates how open border and sanctuary politicians endanger Americans. Under President Trump and Secretary Mullin, we will continue to put the safety of Americans first and fight to get criminal illegal aliens like this out of our communities to no longer prey on and victimize innocent children.”
According to DHS, Contreras-Suarez entered the U.S. illegally in March 2023 at San Ysidro, California before being released into the country by federal authorities during President Biden’s administration. He was later arrested by police in Medford, Massachusetts for armed robbery, prostitution, and assault with a dangerous weapon but was released due to local sanctuary policies.
The outcome has prompted debate over sentencing practices as well as immigration enforcement policies related to individuals charged or convicted of serious crimes.
