You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Domestic Violence related interview experience
- Thread starter dv02
- Start date
Getting case vacated
I did some research on the terminology of the word used as applicable to cases.
Getting a case "vacated" means that the attorney files a motion in the court to remove the old judgment on the case. The motion to remove the old judgment goes to the judge, who decides if there were any technicalities or process not followed by court. If the judge agrees, then the old judgment is vacated.
In such circumstances where the case is vacated, then the individual could be again in the court as if it was a new case. The case then go to trial and a new judgment could be passed.
"Dismissing the case" is entirely different than getting the case "vacated".
Thanks.
I did some research on the terminology of the word used as applicable to cases.
Getting a case "vacated" means that the attorney files a motion in the court to remove the old judgment on the case. The motion to remove the old judgment goes to the judge, who decides if there were any technicalities or process not followed by court. If the judge agrees, then the old judgment is vacated.
In such circumstances where the case is vacated, then the individual could be again in the court as if it was a new case. The case then go to trial and a new judgment could be passed.
"Dismissing the case" is entirely different than getting the case "vacated".
Thanks.
What does getting case vacated mean? And how is it different from getting the case dismissed.
Thanks.
hello guys i have a quick question. if i was arrested for violating a restraining order but the judge found me to be 'in compliance of the order' and 'the underlying indirect criminal contempt withdrawn with prejudice'. now i was arrested because she claimed i sent her text messages. i cant believe i got arrested for text messages. anyway, the plaintiff never showed up to court (because she knew it was a lie). the maximum possible penalty for violating court order is 6 months. however no sentence was imposed since i was found to be incompliance. i never contacted her since and promised never to do so as long as i stay indian. i left the country with an expiredd F1 visa and had to go to consulate for interview. during interview, he asked me whether i was arrested. i said yes. explained to him the situation, but i forgot my court documents. he issued me a 221g saying additional administrative review. but on the same document, it said, they need my passport. Now, i sent them the passport with my court documents through courier. but then the passport got returned to me because it was damaged. i got a new passport and resent it to them. now i got a message from the us embassy that i will be receiving my passport back in the next 2-3 days. whats going on? why would they ask for my passport? am i rejected for visa? any thoughts would be helpful. thanks....
dv02 - Did you plead guilty or "no contest"? or did you plead not guilty?
If you plead not guilty and there was no conviction on jury/judge part and you don't admit facts sufficient to find you guilty then you are not convicted ffrom immigration point of view => therefore they may not remove you.
However you still could be denied citizenship due to lack of good moral character.
If you plead not guilty and there was no conviction on jury/judge part and you don't admit facts sufficient to find you guilty then you are not convicted ffrom immigration point of view => therefore they may not remove you.
However you still could be denied citizenship due to lack of good moral character.
Look, I had domestic violence charge against me in 93. It was dismissed, but I spent a night in jail. Then again in 95, I had three mistm. charges about soliciting prostitution.In two charges, i was found guilty. After 1 yr probation, charges were dismissed. I had to disclose everything and I did. I had a lawyer for my interview. My interview was today. It went good .IO approved my application. So take it from me. Do not worry. I worried for 7 months.(15 years altogether). After lots of prayers and willingness to face the reality, i decided to apply. I am glad I did. They are humans. They understand, people have lives. Unless you commited serious felony (aggraveted as they say), you will be ok. I advise everyone, please don't scare people, unless you realy have the knowledge and experience.I may be just lucky. My lawyer did not have to do anything, but I think it is good to have a lawyer present. Good Luck.
elliot4004
Registered Users (C)
I think having a lawyer present during interview does not really change their decision but consulting a lawyer prior to applying for naturalization is important. Generally all applications with criminal arrest are usually sent for further review anyway. Nevertheless congrats with your smooth interview. Now you can have a peace of mind after 15 yrs
Pleaded "No Contest" on DV charges
ganjik,
Thanks for the reply.
I had pleaded "No Contest" to the charges. The resultant was "With-held Adjudication" with 26 weeks of Anger Management classes and probation for 1 year with early termination. The probation was terminated as soon as I completed the anger management classes.
Currently, I am working with my criminal attorney to get my case "vacated". I have interview next month, which I will try to get postponed till (if possible) the outcome of motion to vacate is finalized.
Thanks.
ganjik,
Thanks for the reply.
I had pleaded "No Contest" to the charges. The resultant was "With-held Adjudication" with 26 weeks of Anger Management classes and probation for 1 year with early termination. The probation was terminated as soon as I completed the anger management classes.
Currently, I am working with my criminal attorney to get my case "vacated". I have interview next month, which I will try to get postponed till (if possible) the outcome of motion to vacate is finalized.
Thanks.
If you plead not guilty and there was no conviction on jury/judge part and you don't admit facts sufficient to find you guilty then you are not convicted ffrom immigration point of view => therefore they may not remove you.
However you still could be denied citizenship due to lack of good moral character.
Last edited by a moderator:
DV charges "Dismissed" is the key
Hopefull44,
Firstly, congratulations on getting through the US Citizenship interview.
Thanks for sharing your experience with Immigration. There is a feel of positiveness and ray-of-optimism, where it looks like the world-is-at-end for individuals like me (who have DV charges).
But the whole point about domestic violence is that the case has to be "Dismissed" so Immigration cannot hold it against you. Secondly, the immigration laws about domestic violence were tightened in 1996. Since your DV incident happened in 1993, I think you might have got a different consideration.
I'm trying to get my case vacated and hopefully dismissed.
But in the end, I did feel better reading your post.
Thanks.
Hopefull44,
Firstly, congratulations on getting through the US Citizenship interview.
Thanks for sharing your experience with Immigration. There is a feel of positiveness and ray-of-optimism, where it looks like the world-is-at-end for individuals like me (who have DV charges).
But the whole point about domestic violence is that the case has to be "Dismissed" so Immigration cannot hold it against you. Secondly, the immigration laws about domestic violence were tightened in 1996. Since your DV incident happened in 1993, I think you might have got a different consideration.
I'm trying to get my case vacated and hopefully dismissed.
But in the end, I did feel better reading your post.
Thanks.
Look, I had domestic violence charge against me in 93. It was dismissed, but I spent a night in jail. Then again in 95, I had three mistm. charges about soliciting prostitution.In two charges, i was found guilty. After 1 yr probation, charges were dismissed. I had to disclose everything and I did. I had a lawyer for my interview. My interview was today. It went good .IO approved my application. So take it from me. Do not worry. I worried for 7 months.(15 years altogether). After lots of prayers and willingness to face the reality, i decided to apply. I am glad I did. They are humans. They understand, people have lives. Unless you commited serious felony (aggraveted as they say), you will be ok. I advise everyone, please don't scare people, unless you realy have the knowledge and experience.I may be just lucky. My lawyer did not have to do anything, but I think it is good to have a lawyer present. Good Luck.
From my research you can vacate or dismiss the case if you were not told by judge about immigration consequences at the time you plead.
If this is true then you have legal rights to vacate or dismiss the case.
If this is true then you have legal rights to vacate or dismiss the case.
ganjik,
Thanks for the reply.
I had pleaded "No Contest" to the charges. The resultant was "With-held Adjudication" with 26 weeks of Anger Management classes and probation for 1 year with early termination. The probation was terminated as soon as I completed the anger management classes.
Currently, I am working with my criminal attorney to get my case "vacated". I have interview next month, which I will try to get postponed till (if possible) the outcome of motion to vacate is finalized.
Thanks.
Plea Agreement
Ganjik,
In my case, the judge didn't mention about immigration consequences verbally but the court made me sign some document which has multiple items. And to my bad luck, it does have an item which says that there could be immigration consequences. Since I had "no contest" and those lines are meant for situations where the defendant is convicted, my attorney will try to fight on the basis that when I signed the said document, I was told that I'm not convicted by the criminal court. It now depends on the judge and how well my attorney can word the motion to vacate the old case to my advantage.
Let's see what fate has in store for me.
Thanks.
Ganjik,
In my case, the judge didn't mention about immigration consequences verbally but the court made me sign some document which has multiple items. And to my bad luck, it does have an item which says that there could be immigration consequences. Since I had "no contest" and those lines are meant for situations where the defendant is convicted, my attorney will try to fight on the basis that when I signed the said document, I was told that I'm not convicted by the criminal court. It now depends on the judge and how well my attorney can word the motion to vacate the old case to my advantage.
Let's see what fate has in store for me.
Thanks.
From my research you can vacate or dismiss the case if you were not told by judge about immigration consequences at the time you plead.
If this is true then you have legal rights to vacate or dismiss the case.
Its good that you have an attorney!
Just make sure you have a good one !
Ask him this - even though you signed a document that stated that there could be an immigration consequencese, still (I have read this somewhere) the judge before accepting your plea should tell you verbally about immigration conseqences! and you assigned attorney at that time should have consulted you on that too! So if they didnt and this is first time you realize there is such an immigration problem you face now then you can legally ask the court to dismiss the case! - I definitely read this somewhere, pls consult with your attorney on this. In courts when they accept your plea they usually video record it so if your attorney could get hands on it and see that indeed you were not told about this verbally and explicitely then you could contest the case.
Just make sure you have a good one !
Ask him this - even though you signed a document that stated that there could be an immigration consequencese, still (I have read this somewhere) the judge before accepting your plea should tell you verbally about immigration conseqences! and you assigned attorney at that time should have consulted you on that too! So if they didnt and this is first time you realize there is such an immigration problem you face now then you can legally ask the court to dismiss the case! - I definitely read this somewhere, pls consult with your attorney on this. In courts when they accept your plea they usually video record it so if your attorney could get hands on it and see that indeed you were not told about this verbally and explicitely then you could contest the case.
Ganjik,
In my case, the judge didn't mention about immigration consequences verbally but the court made me sign some document which has multiple items. And to my bad luck, it does have an item which says that there could be immigration consequences. Since I had "no contest" and those lines are meant for situations where the defendant is convicted, my attorney will try to fight on the basis that when I signed the said document, I was told that I'm not convicted by the criminal court. It now depends on the judge and how well my attorney can word the motion to vacate the old case to my advantage.
Let's see what fate has in store for me.
Thanks.
Video Recording seen and heard
Ganjik,
Thanks for your suggestion.
I already have the video recording of my hearing and also all the documents from the court. I went over the recording with my attorney and he told me exactly what you have stated in your last posting. He even pulled the statute which tells that the judge should have explicitly told me about it. But you never know how things might turn. I 'm just keeping my fingers crossed.
Can you please point me to the place where you saw a similar case?
Thanks for your help.
Ganjik,
Thanks for your suggestion.
I already have the video recording of my hearing and also all the documents from the court. I went over the recording with my attorney and he told me exactly what you have stated in your last posting. He even pulled the statute which tells that the judge should have explicitly told me about it. But you never know how things might turn. I 'm just keeping my fingers crossed.
Can you please point me to the place where you saw a similar case?
Thanks for your help.
Just make sure you have a good one !
Ask him this - even though you signed a document that stated that there could be an immigration consequencese, still (I have read this somewhere) the judge before accepting your plea should tell you verbally about immigration conseqences! and you assigned attorney at that time should have consulted you on that too! So if they didnt and this is first time you realize there is such an immigration problem you face now then you can legally ask the court to dismiss the case! - I definitely read this somewhere, pls consult with your attorney on this. In courts when they accept your plea they usually video record it so if your attorney could get hands on it and see that indeed you were not told about this verbally and explicitely then you could contest the case.
"precedent" is the key
I am not able to find it. What i did is I was looking for "precedents" for DV cases - jsut do search on google for "Domestic violence" "Immigration", appeal etc. I was able to stumble upon a site where there was a story about a young mom being deported because she admitted hitting her 4 y.o. baby hand and there was little bruise left blah bla blah - but the essence of the story was that her attorneys reversed her plead from guilty to not guylty based on a fact that judge didnt verbally informed her about immigration consequences of her plead. There was disaster gonna happen like baby was an american and mother had a GC and mother was almost deported. but in the end her plea was reversed. This is so-called "precedent" in legal terms. If this was ruled in her favor once it should be ruled like this all the time, so your case is looking good, you just make sure your attorney finds this and several other "precedents" of your case.
I am not able to find it. What i did is I was looking for "precedents" for DV cases - jsut do search on google for "Domestic violence" "Immigration", appeal etc. I was able to stumble upon a site where there was a story about a young mom being deported because she admitted hitting her 4 y.o. baby hand and there was little bruise left blah bla blah - but the essence of the story was that her attorneys reversed her plead from guilty to not guylty based on a fact that judge didnt verbally informed her about immigration consequences of her plead. There was disaster gonna happen like baby was an american and mother had a GC and mother was almost deported. but in the end her plea was reversed. This is so-called "precedent" in legal terms. If this was ruled in her favor once it should be ruled like this all the time, so your case is looking good, you just make sure your attorney finds this and several other "precedents" of your case.
Ganjik,
Thanks for your suggestion.
I already have the video recording of my hearing and also all the documents from the court. I went over the recording with my attorney and he told me exactly what you have stated in your last posting. He even pulled the statute which tells that the judge should have explicitly told me about it. But you never know how things might turn. I 'm just keeping my fingers crossed.
Can you please point me to the place where you saw a similar case?
Thanks for your help.
I am not a lawyer, so I could well be wrong, however my understanding is that precedent is set by one or more cases heard by an appellate court, and only applies to lower courts under the same jurisdiction. i.e. if the precedent is set by the California supreme court, it affects all future cases heard by Californian courts.
Only precedent set within a federal court applies to all the states.
Only precedent set within a federal court applies to all the states.
A similar case in the past
Boatbod,
Thanks for clarifying the meaning of "precedent".
A similar case in some court might not be argued in different court (state) but it might be helpful to know that it happened in one of the states in US. It just improves a little probability in winning the case by just mentioning it. I'm not a lawyer but if I did know of a similar case, I would surely mention to my attorney and let him make the call.
Thanks to you and ganjik in sharing your insight.
Boatbod,
Thanks for clarifying the meaning of "precedent".
A similar case in some court might not be argued in different court (state) but it might be helpful to know that it happened in one of the states in US. It just improves a little probability in winning the case by just mentioning it. I'm not a lawyer but if I did know of a similar case, I would surely mention to my attorney and let him make the call.
Thanks to you and ganjik in sharing your insight.
Attorney can find a precedent for you
Attorneys (at least crminial ones) have an access to database with all the cases and they can do all sorts of "queries" (searches) on it, the same way you do on Google. So for him it would be couple hours of work to find precedents for your case, just ask him to search that database.
good luck and keep me up to date.
Attorneys (at least crminial ones) have an access to database with all the cases and they can do all sorts of "queries" (searches) on it, the same way you do on Google. So for him it would be couple hours of work to find precedents for your case, just ask him to search that database.
good luck and keep me up to date.
Boatbod,
Thanks for clarifying the meaning of "precedent".
A similar case in some court might not be argued in different court (state) but it might be helpful to know that it happened in one of the states in US. It just improves a little probability in winning the case by just mentioning it. I'm not a lawyer but if I did know of a similar case, I would surely mention to my attorney and let him make the call.
Thanks to you and ganjik in sharing your insight.
yep, perhaps you are right. but the case i was talking about was resolved by appelate court (not sure if it was federal though)
I am not a lawyer, so I could well be wrong, however my understanding is that precedent is set by one or more cases heard by an appellate court, and only applies to lower courts under the same jurisdiction. i.e. if the precedent is set by the California supreme court, it affects all future cases heard by Californian courts.
Only precedent set within a federal court applies to all the states.
Jackolantern
Registered Users (C)
Even the Federal court precedents are sometimes limited, as there are Federal district courts and their precedents are only binding on the states covered by that district. However, the Federal district courts are still influenced by other districts and if they make a ruling that differs from a similar case in another district they will usually reference the case and state the reason for the disagreement.I am not a lawyer, so I could well be wrong, however my understanding is that precedent is set by one or more cases heard by an appellate court, and only applies to lower courts under the same jurisdiction. i.e. if the precedent is set by the California supreme court, it affects all future cases heard by Californian courts.
Only precedent set within a federal court applies to all the states.
JohnnyCash
Volunteer Moderator
A criminal case could be vacated and an immigration judge wouldn't deport an alien despite of any kind of conviction on a deportable offense IF criminal judge failed to inform the alien about the immigration consequences at the time of accepting/approving a plea deal.