Appellant appealed from the denial of his motion to set aside his guilty plea to carjacking, contending that the trial court did not adequately explain to him the immigration consequences of his plea. Appellant was orally advised that he could be deported and denied re-entry, and initialed a box on the plea form which advised that a consequence of conviction could be deportation and exclusion. The words used in the admonition here were the equivalent of the statutory language, and adequately advised appellant of the potential consequences. There was no evidentiary support for the argument that appellant did not understand the immigration consequences of his plea.