How to Report "Adjourned in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACD)" case on N-400 Form?

[Bobsmyth]

Why not just say "excluding non-durg or alcohol related traffic violations"?

You mean to say "excluding non drug or non alcohol related traffic violations.'

That would still leave possibility of applicants not disclosing other serious traffic violations,like hit and run.

It explain why "excluding traffic violation" was removed. But what
is the reasoning behind breaking "Have you ever been arrested, cited, detaied, charged, convicted,fined, imprisioned for breaking or violating any law or odinance?" into several questions?

Also, breaking it down into several questions makes the determination of a conviction for immigration law easier and the determination of GMC easier to track down for the IO at interview.

 

[WBH]

You mean to say "excluding non drug or non alcohol related traffic violations.'


Also, breaking it down into several questions makes the determination of a conviction for immigration law easier and the determination of GMC easier to track down for the IO at interview.

It pretty much place the burden on the shoulder of the applicant, which
is exactly the purpose of the OP. Not only one has the burden
of answering questiosn more specififcally but also carry the risk being
charged of perjury if you answer one question incorrectly.

 

[Bobsmyth]

It pretty much place the burden on the shoulder of the applicant, which
is exactly the purpose of the OP. Not only one has the burden
of answering questiosn more specififcally but also carry the risk being
charged of perjury if you answer one question incorrectly.

Answering incorrectly in itself is not the issue since the applicant has the opportunity to clarify themself at interview. However, purposefully answering incorrectly in order to hide a material fact is another story and can cause big problems for an applicant.

 

[WBH]

Answering incorrectly in itself is not the issue since the applicant has the opportunity to clarify themself at interview. However, purposefully answering incorrectly in order to hide a material fact is another story and can cause big problems for an applicant.

The tricky thing is if one is not 100% sure how to answer say question 18 and 19 like OP's situation, he may choose to answer it in his favor to make himself look better. I don't know if that is purposely answering incorrectly
if the IO think the other way

 

[Bobsmyth]

Again, you are given the chance to clarify how you answered each question at the interview. If you answer NO in the hopes it will make you look good at interview, but during interview the IO questions you more and decides the answer should have been YES instead after you openly provide details of the case then it's not an issue. However, if you answer NO and the IO feels you are not forthcoming by concealing some fact, then it would be an issue.

 

[WBH]

the IO feels .

The whole point is that we don't know which way can make the IO
feel how. If one had been smarter, one should not have thi sprobem
in the first place so he could just check No fro all those questions

 

[WhoRunTings]

the deed is DONE

I mailed my application! For the record, my final answers:

Q15
NO

Q16
YES

Q17: Have you ever been charged with committing any crime or offense?
YES

Q18: Have you ever been convicted of a crime or offense?
NO

Q19: Have you ever been placed in an alternative sentencing or a rehabilitative program (for example: diversion, deferred prosecution, withheld adjudication, deferred adjudication)?
YES

Q20: Have you ever received a suspended sentence, been placed on probation, or been paroled?
NO

I'll post in this thread again after the interview, to let everyone know how it went. BTW check out my awesome new sig...

 

[thg12]

Again, I don't think it matters what OP answers for question 19 since he'll still have to explain the details of offense and demonstrate that he indicated he never entered a plea and/or never admitted to sufficient facts to find guilt. The IO will make a GMC determination based on all the facts presented , and will most likely request to see the court documents. I would suggest writing a detailed letter explaining the charges that specifies OP did not enter plea and never admitted to sufficient facts to find guilt and present this to the IO at interview for the record. In the end, your best defense is what you present in form of documentation, not what you originally answered on application to that question.

Based on newer research I did I (but I'm not a lawyer and really know nothing) it would appear you are correct. Many times an ACD is given even when the defendant enters a guilty plea and actually committed a crime and the facts reflect that (petty larceny etc.). In this case technically they didn't try you and they didn't even test the alleged substance to even show what it was. They can't prosecute you without even testing the alleged substance and if you didn't admit to anything or enter a plea then they actually denied you a chance to fight the charge.

If on the other hand they actually tested the substance and let you enter a plea to get "deferred adjudication" to avoid prosecution that's a different matter. They would then give you probation.

Read this: http://www.queensdefense.com/immigration2.htm

and this:

http://www.queensdefense.com/marijuana.htm

and also the last paragraph of:

http://www.queensdefense.com/summons_cases.htm

Also this is a good read:

http://www.desk-appearance-ticket.com/Criminal_Record/CriminalRecord.htm


Yes, all my links are to this one lawyer but I actually spoke to him and he was the nicest guy explaining everything to me even after hours because I called his "emergency" number.

Now I can't vouch for the information there per se, but I'm going assume it is correct and it is better information than anyone else has given me. He also told me how exactly in NYC to get a certificate of disposition (address, timings, exact change etc). This is something no lawyer has ever bothered to tell me.

However he did forget to tell me that to get a certificate of disposition for a sealed case (they don't even give to the defendant sometimes) you need to bring a notarized letter stating you the actual defendant so they can release it to you. That information I got from the NY courts website.

Please feel free to provide your thoughts on this situation.

 

[WhoRunTings]

follow-up after interview

Hi all...

Well, finally had the interview where this arrest of mine has been discussed. I wish I could say it gave me insight into how to answer Questions 15-21, but it hasn't. The IO repeatedly asked me why I answered "yes" or "no" to individual questions, and I said it came from my arrest, handing the IO the court deposition.

My final thoughts are -- it doesn't really matter if you get Q15-21 "right" or not. Everything will be resolved at the interview. Just be honest and thorough and let the IO figure out the "yes" or "no" part.

My IO marked all over Q15-21. I tried to watch what was being written, but couldn't figure it out -- very fast and illegible handwriting.

But I can tell you that none of the yes/no answers were amended, so I must have gotten them "right".

 

[StonedAnt]

Hello,

Thanks for sharing your interview experience. I hope everything works out for you soon and keep updating us with any progress.


Stoned!

 

[WhoRunTings]

My IO marked all over Q15-21. I tried to watch what was being written, but couldn't figure it out -- very fast and illegible handwriting.

But I can tell you that none of the yes/no answers were amended, so I must have gotten them "right".

I should clarify what I meant by that. At the end of your interview, the IO goes over amendments (changes) that he/she made to your application. The IO counts them up and reads them off to you. You then sign off on those changes. None of my 9 amendments included Q15-21 on Part 10.

But the IO certainly did write a bunch of stuff all over those questions, everything EXCEPT changing the YES/NO answers part. The IO must have just taken a bunch of additional notes and wrote them on top of the questions.

 

[nekto]

I am adjusting to GC and I had ACD for possession of control ed substance. Police stopped a car and found small amount of substance in questions. I was a passenger, but all people in the car were taken to police station and issued court appearance tickets. So I got ACD and after 6 month case was closed. Now my question is -- Should I disclose it to USCIS >? I got another petty misdemeanor offense on my record and USCIS sked me to bring judgment on misdemeanor only (never mentioned ACD). I traveled outside US with ACD and prior to my misdemeanor charge and never had any problems. Also I ordered FBI fingerprints background check ( as I understand the same stuff what USCIS sees) and it does have only misdemeanor record and no record of ACD incident.. So do you think should I disclose ACD or take my chances that record is errased and immigration won't see it?
Any help is greatly appreciated!!!

 

[Bobsmyth]

I am adjusting to GC and I had ACD for possession of control ed substance. Police stopped a car and found small amount of substance in questions. I was a passenger, but all people in the car were taken to police station and issued court appearance tickets. So I got ACD and after 6 month case was closed. Now my question is -- Should I disclose it to USCIS >? I got another petty misdemeanor offense on my record and USCIS sked me to bring judgment on misdemeanor only (never mentioned ACD). I traveled outside US with ACD and prior to my misdemeanor charge and never had any problems. Also I ordered FBI fingerprints background check ( as I understand the same stuff what USCIS sees) and it does have only misdemeanor record and no record of ACD incident.. So do you think should I disclose ACD or take my chances that record is errased and immigration won't see it?
Any help is greatly appreciated!!!

It's not a question of should but rather of must. You must disclose it as it involved detainment and arrest.