how to explain Trespas charge on Citizenship interview

[hardknocks77]

Hello there,

My wife is going for her interview on March 28th at Fairfax office in VA. She has one arrest for a shoplift charge in 2006, which was reduced to Trespas and she was given supervised probation for 1 year and thats it. Case was dismissed in Feb, 2007. My question is that how can she explain to the Interviewing officer about the shoplifting charge and the plea bargain after, should we tell the officer that it was a 'misunderstanding' or should we tell the officer that she made a mistake with shoplift. Any help would be really appreciated. Thanks.

 

[WBH]

It is said usually the IO did not ask "Did you do it" question but usually asked "what happened". Your wife can just say
"I was charged with shoplifting and it was reduced to trespass" without diretcly mentioning whether really did it or not.
But the IO indeed may ask"Did you really steal anything?". I remmemeber there was a post here regarding a domestic violence
case, the IO did ask"Did you hit your wife?"

I had a concealed weapon charge before I got the GC and when the IO asked aout it in N-400 interview I just said
"I put a revolver in my trunk and I did not know it is illegal and I apologized for what I did and I am sorry"

 

[hardknocks77]

It is said usually the IO did not ask "Did you do it" question but usually asked "what happened". Your wife can just say
"I was charged with shoplifting and it was reduced to trespass" without diretcly mentioning whether really did it or not.
But the IO indeed may ask"Did you really steal anything?". I remmemeber there was a post here regarding a domestic violence
case, the IO did ask"Did you hit your wife?"

I had a concealed weapon charge before I got the GC and when the IO asked aout it in N-400 interview I just said
"I put a revolver in my trunk and I did not know it is illegal and I apologized for what I did and I am sorry"

Thanks for the response WBH. So my concern is that if the officer does ask about it, should we provide some detail but not other since the lady who took my wife in, also added other things in the theft charge which was not true. So she could truthfully say that she did not commit that crime. I am just looking for some sort of defense for her if the interviewing officer starts asking too many questions. Plus doesn't the 5 year behavior count towards it, since everything about that incident happened more than 7 years ago.

 

[WBH]

I think your wife shouldbe honest. If she indeed stole, she should admit it and since there is no conviction on theft
plus it is mor ethan 5 years so it does not matter.

If you want to be on safe side, double check with the original charges and see if it is a petty theft or grand theft
and check out maximum penalty by laws in your area.

I remember another post. The poster and his wife went to interview together and wife went in first. They
had a theft charge together. When it was his turn, the IO even laughted:"So you have the same problem as you wife".
Both were approved anyway.

But again, check if the shoplift is petty theft or grand theft

 

[hardknocks77]

I think your wife shouldbe honest. If she indeed stole, she should admit it and since there is no conviction on theft
plus it is mor ethan 5 years so it does not matter.

If you want to be on safe side, double check with the original charges and see if it is a petty theft or grand theft
and check out maximum penalty by laws in your area.

I remember another post. The poster and his wife went to interview together and wife went in first. They
had a theft charge together. When it was his turn, the IO even laughted:"So you have the same problem as you wife".
Both were approved anyway.

But again, check if the shoplift is petty theft or grand theft

Appreciate your response WBH. So the original charge was made more than it should have been by them adding more than $100 worth of merchandise that was being purchased by my wife. My wife did conceal 2 clothing items totaling $100, but the other stuff was added by the lady which put the total above $200, which is considered Grand theft in Virginia. So truthfully, my wife could state that she concealed two clothing items, which was a terrible mistake, which would have been petty theft at worst, would that cause any issues with her interview.

 

[WBH]

Appreciate your response WBH. So the original charge was made more than it should have been by them adding more than $100 worth of merchandise that was being purchased by my wife. My wife did conceal 2 clothing items totaling $100, but the other stuff was added by the lady which put the total above $200, which is considered Grand theft in Virginia. So truthfully, my wife could state that she concealed two clothing items, which was a terrible mistake, which would have been petty theft at worst, would that cause any issues with her interview.

In theory no. Because for such things the IO is supposed to only look at actual convictions and conviction equivalent.
If your wife never plead guilty to teh shoplift charge then there is no conviction at all and the only conviction is about
trespassing and it was 5 years ago.

But still to be on the safe side, you can speculate what woudl happen if yoru wife had been convicted on original charge.
If it would still be OK, then you would be perfectly safe. I say such because I think USCIS ios suppsoed to lok at conviction
but not always. They can make an issue with moral turpitude even if there is no convction but I believe such
is reserved for serious crime: Just imagien applicants telling the IO: "I raped women, killed a lot people and I admit I did all these
but due to techincality or some reason I was not convicted but was foudn not guilty". You can not imagine USCIS would grant citizenship to such applicants. I am using an extreme scenario to make my point. Hope youc an see what I mean


applicants.

 

[hardknocks77]

In theory no. Because for such things the IO is supposed to only look at actual convictions and conviction equivalent.
If your wife never plead guilty to teh shoplift charge then there is no conviction at all and the only conviction is about
trespassing and it was 5 years ago.

But still to be on the safe side, you can speculate what woudl happen if yoru wife had been convicted on original charge.
If it would still be OK, then you would be perfectly safe. I say such because I think USCIS ios suppsoed to lok at conviction
but not always. They can make an issue with moral turpitude even if there is no convction but I believe such
is reserved for serious crime: Just imagien applicants telling the IO: "I raped women, killed a lot people and I admit I did all these
but due to techincality or some reason I was not convicted but was foudn not guilty". You can not imagine USCIS would grant citizenship to such applicants. I am using an extreme scenario to make my point. Hope youc an see what I mean


applicants.

So I am thinking if I should have a lawyer represent my wife during her naturalization interview. Her case is explained in the earlier posts, she was convicted of Trespass with 1 year probation and 50 hours community service and the case was dismissed on Feb, 2007. The original charge was for Felony grand theft (> $200), which was not correct at all. She did conceal 2 items (which were listed for $100 total), but the other stuff was added by the store security person.

I wanted to see if there any recommendations for good immigration lawyers in the Fairfax area to attend my wife's naturalization interview. Thanks.

 

[Jackolantern]

She should shut her mouth about what she did or didn't do, and just hand over the court paperwork for that incident.

 

[WBH]

She should shut her mouth about what she did or didn't do, and just hand over the court paperwork for that incident.

If the IO ask what happens, she can not remian silent any more. She can not invoke 5th since she is not
on the crminal charge and there is no such risk any more since she was already tried.

 

[Jackolantern]

If the IO ask what happens, she can not remian silent any more.

She can keep her mouth shuts if she wants. The court paper is her answer. Then it's up to the IO whether to deny her on that basis even after receiving the court papers. Most likely the IO won't push her to answer, and won't deny her for not answering because the denial would be on weak ground given that the court papers have been provided.

 

[WBH]

She can keep her mouth shuts if she wants. The court paper is her answer. Then it's up to the IO whether to deny her on that basis even after receiving the court papers. Most likely the IO won't push her to answer, and won't deny her for not answering because the denial would be on weak ground given that the court papers have been provided.

If OJ Simpson was a PR and applied for citizenship, would you think the IO would not ask:"Did you really kill your wife?"
and OJ would juist answwer "I was charged with that but I was aquited by court. Please see my court papers".
Would the USCIS grant him ctiizenship?

 

[Jackolantern]

If OJ Simpson was a PR and applied for citizenship, would you think the IO would not ask:"Did you really kill your wife?"
and OJ would juist answwer "I was charged with that but I was aquited by court. Please see my court papers".
Would the USCIS grant him ctiizenship?

They might not want to approve him, but he was acquitted and didn't admit to the murder or accept any other criminal penalty for it, so if they denied him he probably would win the appeal (of course, we're talking as if his other criminal case didn't happen yet).

 

[WBH]

They might not want to approve him, but he was acquitted and didn't admit to the murder or accept any other criminal penalty for it, so if they denied him he probably would win the appeal (of course, we're talking as if his other criminal case didn't happen yet).

I doubt it. The USCIS can argue they have good evidence the person indeed killed his wife (and cited civil lawsuit corut decision)
so had not good moral character. If OJ appealed it, I believe in the appeal court, he could be still asked
that question: "Did you do it?". If teh answer is Yes, teh citizenship woudl be denied, If he answered No,
the USCIS would collect evidence and acused him of perjury, which also reflect good moral character

Of course this is about murder in a scenario but applied to the OP. But Felony Grand Theft can still be serious.

 

[hardknocks77]

I doubt it. The USCIS can argue they have good evidence the person indeed killed his wife (and cited civil lawsuit corut decision)
so had not good moral character. If OJ appealed it, I believe in the appeal court, he could be still asked
that question: "Did you do it?". If teh answer is Yes, teh citizenship woudl be denied, If he answered No,
the USCIS would collect evidence and acused him of perjury, which also reflect good moral character

Of course this is about murder in a scenario but applied to the OP. But Felony Grand Theft can still be serious.

Is it worth it to get a lawyer with her...even though she 100% denies doing the grand theft, which is more than $200 worth of concealment, she did conceal 2 clothing items which were total worth $100. All this happened more than 6 years ago, past the 5 year statutory period. Thanks.

 

[WBH]

Is it worth it to get a lawyer with her...even though she 100% denies doing the grand theft, which is more than $200 worth of concealment, she did conceal 2 clothing items which were total worth $100. All this happened more than 6 years ago, past the 5 year statutory period. Thanks.

I'll say forget about the lawyer unless you have a lot of money to spare.
During the interview, lawyers are just observers and can nnot do much.

 

[hardknocks77]

I'll say forget about the lawyer unless you have a lot of money to spare.
During the interview, lawyers are just observers and can nnot do much.

Thanks WBH for the response...I thought lawyer would represent her during the interview and when the IO asks about this charge/disposition, then the lawyer would be the one replying with the response. My wife doesn't have any other issues on the application, she doesn't even have any traffic citations in the past 5 years, she did conceal 2 items worth $100 which was a terrible mistake, but she did not commit any Grand larceny...so I am leaning towards not hiring a $1000 lawyer for an hour or so....

 

[WBH]

Thanks WBH for the response...I thought lawyer would represent her during the interview and when the IO asks about this charge/disposition, then the lawyer would be the one replying with the response. My wife doesn't have any other issues on the application, she doesn't even have any traffic citations in the past 5 years, she did conceal 2 items worth $100 which was a terrible mistake, but she did not commit any Grand larceny...so I am leaning towards not hiring a $1000 lawyer for an hour or so....

The lawyer observe but can intervene if he think the IO ask an improper question. I think it is good enough for your wife
to decide on her own. Just don't mislead the IO there is anything more serious than "conceal 2 items worth $100".

The interview usually last only 10 minutes and in case of your wife it may be 20 minutes. But if you hire a lawyer
you have to pay for his time spent on waiting, travelling etc. A lawyer will have to spend at least half-day for you
even actual interview only accoutn for 5 %-10% of that time

 

[Jackolantern]

I'll say forget about the lawyer unless you have a lot of money to spare.
During the interview, lawyers are just observers and can nnot do much.

But their presence can deter the interviewer from diving into fishing expeditions like "So what really happened? did you do X Y or Z?" With the lawyer in the room the interviewer will accept the court paperwork and move on.

Their value is not what they do, it's what they deter the interviewer from doing. It's like having a bodyguard; most of the time they don't do anything, but their presence deters people from doing bad things to you.

 

[Jackolantern]

Thanks WBH for the response...I thought lawyer would represent her during the interview and when the IO asks about this charge/disposition, then the lawyer would be the one replying with the response. My wife doesn't have any other issues on the application, she doesn't even have any traffic citations in the past 5 years, she did conceal 2 items worth $100 which was a terrible mistake, but she did not commit any Grand larceny...so I am leaning towards not hiring a $1000 lawyer for an hour or so....

There are lawyers who charge a fixed fee to accompany someone to the interview. You may be able to find one for $500. You can choose one of the cheaper lawyers, because they're not really there to do anything, their main value is with just being present in the interview room.

 

[WBH]

But their presence can deter the interviewer from diving into fishing expeditions like "So what really happened? did you do X Y or Z?"

But the OP's wife is already to answer that with honesty: "I just concealed two pieces of clothing worth no mmore than $ 100".
If it occurrued outside 5 year window, she should be fine even if she had been convicted of that and She was not even
convicted. There was even a petty theft exception clause for petty theft within 5 year. The only issue with the OP's wife
is that the original charge is Grand Theft but there was no conviction.