N-335 Denial Letter Fight it or Options?

[phoenix5]

Personal history:
I'm 40 years old, been in the US for 33 years as a permanent resident (came as a refugee). Graduated High School and College. I served in the US Air Force for 4 years as Active Duty; served in Desert Storm and was Honorably discharge from the service. Never been in any legal trouble from before in my whole life except 3 speeding tickets; two of which were from high school days.

Legal case:
After getting out of the military, I used my savings and opened up an online stock trading account. I was very successful and made huge returns. This success got around and eventually got me in trouble. Two distant Uncles who were avid investors, in their mid 50s, called up one day and ask me to join their "Investment Club".
After several months of talking about it, I joined and we pooled our money together into a single account and started buying stocks together. In early 2000 when the Internet bubble crash, the market tanked (went down), and our pooled of cash went down the drain. Individually, I lost most of my money and they also lost as well. Together in our pool, we lost most of it. They were upset that they lost their money (from the pool) and felt that I should have made better judgement of the stocks that we bought TOGETHER. After several harsh words and ill-feelings they reported me to the police that I didn't have a license to invest with other people's money. After a costly legal battle with the District Court, I was found guilty on "offer or sale of unregistered security" BECAUSE the prosecutor felt I needed a license to invest because other people's money was involved. Long story short, the stocks (security) that we bought were legal and listed on the NYSE and Nasdaq Exchange, the charges can be misleading if you don't fully understand the reasoning behind the "unregistered security" charge.

I had no other choice but to plead guilty and pay resitution of $38K and was put on probation 5 years from comitting similar offense. I never went to jail, I just had to pay $38K in resitution and was on 5 year of probation. Both which I met without any problem. My probation ended March 2006. My charge after the 5 year probation, of "stay imposition" is a misdemeanor. This is what shows up in my record.

Almost 5 years later from the ending date of my probation, in November 2010, I applied for Naturalization. I never lied about anything and was open with the Interviewing Officer about my only run-in with the law. It's been about 2 months since my Interview, I just received a denial letter yesterday. The denial letter is 2 pages, I summarized the important parts from the letter below.
Form N-335 denial letter I got:
======================================================
Pursuant to the investigation and examination of your application it is determined that you are ineligible for naturalization for the following reason(s):

This decision is made with prejudice toward filing a new application in the future.

8 CFR 316.10(b)(1) states in part:
An applicant shall be found to lack good moral character if the applicant has been... (ii)convicted of an aggravated felony as defined in section 101(a)(43) of the Act on or after November 29, 1990.

Section 101(a)(43) of the Act defines the term "aggravated felony" as:
(M) An offense that... (i) involves fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000.

Minnesota statue states: It is unlawful for any person to offer or sell any security in this State unless (a) it is registered under sections 80A.01 to 80A.31 or (b) the security or tansaction is exempted under section 80A.15 or (c) it is a federal covered security.

The records shows that you plead guilty on January, 2001 in the County District Court of City, State to the Offer or Sale of Unregistered Security (Minnesota State Statue 80A.08; 80A.14; 80A.15; 80A.22, Subdivision 1). You were sentenced to a stay of imposition until March 1, 2006, five years of probation until March 1, 2006, up to 90 days incarceration and ordered to pay resitution in the amount of $30,000 to the victims. Total loss to the victims was in excess of $10,000 which meets the definition of an aggravated felony.

The record shows that you were convicted of an aggravated felony. This conviction precludes a finding of good moral character in accordance with the law. Accordingly, your Form N-400 must be, and hereby is, denied.

If you desire to request a review hearing on this decision pursuant to Section 336(a) of the Act, you must file a request for a hearing within 30 days of the date of this notice. If no request for hearing is filed within the time allowed, this decision is final.
======================================================

I have 2 QUESTIONS:
(1) What does this mean: "This decision is made with prejudice toward filing a new application in the future." ?
-does this mean, if I apply 10yrs from now, this case will be weighed against me? So, it's pointless to apply ever?

(2) What are the chances of winning a natualization if I get an Immigration lawyer and fight this case?
-or am I wasting my money?

I'm in Minnesota.

Thanks in advance for any feedback and have a great day!

 

[Cherr1985]

The answer of number #2 depends on #1. Number #1 basically says that your previous conviction is against you to apply for citizenship.

For citizenship, regardless that you already paid your dues, went to jail or even reinstate to the victims their money, it is what it is: convicted of aggravated felony.

I maybe wrong...but that's my understanding.

 

[baikal3]

Personal history:
I'm 40 years old, been in the US for 33 years as a permanent resident (came as a refugee). Graduated High School and College. I served in the US Air Force for 4 years as Active Duty; served in Desert Storm and was Honorably discharge from the service. Never been in any legal trouble from before in my whole life except 3 speeding tickets; two of which were from high school days.

Legal case:
After getting out of the military, I used my savings and opened up an online stock trading account. I was very successful and made huge returns. This success got around and eventually got me in trouble. Two distant Uncles who were avid investors, in their mid 50s, called up one day and ask me to join their "Investment Club".
After several months of talking about it, I joined and we pooled our money together into a single account and started buying stocks together. In early 2000 when the Internet bubble crash, the market tanked (went down), and our pooled of cash went down the drain. Individually, I lost most of my money and they also lost as well. Together in our pool, we lost most of it. They were upset that they lost their money (from the pool) and felt that I should have made better judgement of the stocks that we bought TOGETHER. After several harsh words and ill-feelings they reported me to the police that I didn't have a license to invest with other people's money. After a costly legal battle with the District Court, I was found guilty on "offer or sale of unregistered security" BECAUSE the prosecutor felt I needed a license to invest because other people's money was involved. Long story short, the stocks (security) that we bought were legal and listed on the NYSE and Nasdaq Exchange, the charges can be misleading if you don't fully understand the reasoning behind the "unregistered security" charge.

I had no other choice but to plead guilty and pay resitution of $38K and was put on probation 5 years from comitting similar offense. I never went to jail, I just had to pay $38K in resitution and was on 5 year of probation. Both which I met without any problem. My probation ended March 2006. My charge after the 5 year probation, of "stay imposition" is a misdemeanor. This is what shows up in my record.

Almost 5 years later from the ending date of my probation, in November 2010, I applied for Naturalization. I never lied about anything and was open with the Interviewing Officer about my only run-in with the law. It's been about 2 months since my Interview, I just received a denial letter yesterday. The denial letter is 2 pages, I summarized the important parts from the letter below.
Form N-335 denial letter I got:
======================================================
Pursuant to the investigation and examination of your application it is determined that you are ineligible for naturalization for the following reason(s):

This decision is made with prejudice toward filing a new application in the future.

8 CFR 316.10(b)(1) states in part:
An applicant shall be found to lack good moral character if the applicant has been... (ii)convicted of an aggravated felony as defined in section 101(a)(43) of the Act on or after November 29, 1990.

Section 101(a)(43) of the Act defines the term "aggravated felony" as:
(M) An offense that... (i) involves fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000.

Minnesota statue states: It is unlawful for any person to offer or sell any security in this State unless (a) it is registered under sections 80A.01 to 80A.31 or (b) the security or tansaction is exempted under section 80A.15 or (c) it is a federal covered security.

The records shows that you plead guilty on January, 2001 in the County District Court of City, State to the Offer or Sale of Unregistered Security (Minnesota State Statue 80A.08; 80A.14; 80A.15; 80A.22, Subdivision 1). You were sentenced to a stay of imposition until March 1, 2006, five years of probation until March 1, 2006, up to 90 days incarceration and ordered to pay resitution in the amount of $30,000 to the victims. Total loss to the victims was in excess of $10,000 which meets the definition of an aggravated felony.

The record shows that you were convicted of an aggravated felony. This conviction precludes a finding of good moral character in accordance with the law. Accordingly, your Form N-400 must be, and hereby is, denied.

If you desire to request a review hearing on this decision pursuant to Section 336(a) of the Act, you must file a request for a hearing within 30 days of the date of this notice. If no request for hearing is filed within the time allowed, this decision is final.
======================================================

I have 2 QUESTIONS:
(1) What does this mean: "This decision is made with prejudice toward filing a new application in the future." ?
-does this mean, if I apply 10yrs from now, this case will be weighed against me? So, it's pointless to apply ever?

(2) What are the chances of winning a natualization if I get an Immigration lawyer and fight this case?
-or am I wasting my money?

I'm in Minnesota.

Thanks in advance for any feedback and have a great day!

A few general comments. You made a huge mistake by filing N-400 without consulting a few immigration lawyers first.

The federal immigration law has its own definition of an "aggravated felony". A crime that may be classified as a misdemeanor under the relevant state law may well qualify as an aggravated felony under the federal immigration law. That is what appears to have happened in your case, based on the wording of the denial notice.

Regarding your questions:

(1) Someone who has been convicted of an aggravated felony is permanently ineligible for the finding of good moral character and thus is permanently ineligible for naturalization. The sentence "This decision is made with prejudice toward filing a new application in the future" basically means that the IO's finding that you had been convicted of an aggravated felony is binding for your future dealings with USCIS and that you are not allowed to file another N-400, regardless of how much time passes (unless you manage to overturn this particular denial on appeal).

(2) That is rather hard to say. You definitely do need to consult several immigration lawyers and get competent professional advice about how to proceed further.


One other thing (and one extra reason to talk to immigration lawyers now). You should be seriously worried about the possibility of deportation. Any aggravated felony is a deportable offense (see http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001227----000-.html "iii) Aggravated felony. Any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable.")

While USCIS does not necessarily refer the cases of N-400 applicants found to have committed deportable offenses to ICE for deportation proceedings, it usually does do so in cases of serious offenses. With an aggravated felony conviction finding in your N-400 file there is a good chance that they may refer your case for deportation proceedings. It is for that reason that you probably should not have filed N-400 in the first place.

Anyway, go and talk to some experienced immigration lawyers about your situation.

 

[Jackolantern]

Were you warned by the judge or your lawyer of the immigration consequences of your guilty plea? If not, and you end up in court fighting deportation, you may be able to use that failure to inform you to defeat the deportation. You also may be able to challenge their finding that this was "fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000" ... apparently they knew before pooling funds that you didn't have a securities license, and you presumably weren't deceiving them of what they were getting into with you.

In any case, you need to consult an experienced immigration lawyer RIGHT NOW. But appealing your naturalization looks like a hopeless case. Your main concern must be what you need to do to preserve your green card.

 

[BigJoe5]

Keep an eye on the U.S. Supreme Court as there is a case involving an aggravated felony under the INA concerning interpretation of the definition pertaining to an amount in excess of the statutory limits. Although that case deals with the IRS code violation rather than securities, it may provide some clarification....

10-577 KAWASHIMA V. HOLDER

DECISION BELOW: 615 F.3d 1043

LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 04-74313, 05-74408

LIMITED TO QUESTION 1 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION.

CERT. GRANTED 5/23/2011

QUESTION PRESENTED:

1. Whether, in direct conflict with the Third Circuit, the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that Petitioners' convictions of filing, and aiding and abetting in filing, a false statement on a corporate tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 7206(1) and (2) were aggravated felonies involving fraud and deceit under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), and Petitioners were therefore removable.

2. Whether the Ninth Circuit's 2010 amendment of its 2007 final judgment concerning Petitioner Fusako Kawashima violated Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, where the Government did not seek rehearing or other review of that final judgment in 2007.

See: http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/grantednotedlist.aspx?Filename=11grantednotedlist.html

 

[phoenix5]

This really makes me sad and MAD

I just want to say "Thank You" very much to all those who responded. I will seek an immigration lawyer asap due to your comments/suggestions. It's unfortunate that one idiotic hindsight and the people at INS believe everybody is perfect but you (me). I guess they are and the first to cast stones because they're all perfect. *more like hypocrites.

I never realized about deportation because nobody ever mentions anything to me about the consequences of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor which is implied as an aggravated felony; which is deportable in the eyes of INS (which is news to me until this post).

What makes me sad about all this is that I'm married with 3 kids and fairly successful with life. Does this mean, the government is going ruin my life so they can take care of my kids and have taxpayers pay for my college loans that I haven't finished paying yet? And foreclosed on my 3 properties and default on the loans, and kick my family to the curb because I'm such an infidel for this one mishap?

What makes me more mad is I already have an idea (based on stories I've heard). I already know what's going to happen, eventually nothing. But what will happen, should it happen, is that they (INS) will ruin my life in attempt to deport me but since I'm a war refugee, that pathetic country where I was born will not accept me back. So I hang in limbo status for years. Eventually, they let me back out with no SSN#. This is a f*k'ed up immigration system. I can understand if I was a rapist or murderer, but an idiotic blue collar misdemeanor crime is deportable according to INS code? Is this some kind of a sick INS joke? *at INS, we take pride in changing lives; separating families across the globe because we have our head up our a$$.

Tangent ranting here, so what about my life that I gave to protect the freedom and rights of this country in Active Duty during Desert Storm? I guess even giving my life to protect this country would be deemed "immoral character" according to INS? What a bunch of bullsh*t!!

I guess I just need to be rich and buy my residency, INS is so f*ked up, according to the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 2011 edition: (since I'm new, I can't post URL links yet), you can find this article by Google'ing: "wall street journal more-super-rich-investors-get-us-citizenship"

 

[Jackolantern]

You mentioned being here for 33 years, you're 40 now so that means you've been here since you were a young child. Did any of your parents become a US citizen before you turned 18? If yes, you might have already derived citizenship through them when you were a child.

If not, you are technically deportable, but that doesn't mean they will actually try to deport you. But it does mean that unless you get that conviction vacated or pardoned, there is a small chance that they will show up at any random time in the future and put you in removal proceedings. So you will need to set aside several thousand dollars for the possibility of a legal defense; in immigration court they don't provide a lawyer, you have to bring and pay your own.

Of course, you want to avoid that situation in the first place, so you need to minimize your interaction with any immigration officials and hope that your case will fade off the immigration radar and be forgotten. Don't travel abroad often, don't ever get arrested again, and stay far from immigration checkpoints in border states.

You might be able to proactively get the conviction vacated on the basis that you were not warned of the immigration consequences in the original trial. However, successfully vacating the conviction invites the possibility of a retrial, so you don't necessarily want to go that route if they're not trying to deport you. On the other hand, if it's vacated and the state either drops the case or find you not guilty on retrial, you not only avoid deportation but you also would become eligible for citizenship.

Try to make friends with somebody in the media, so if you ever find yourself fighting deportation your story can get publicized quickly. Obviously it doesn't look good for them to be trying to deport a veteran for a misdemeanor.

You could write to the governor of MN for a pardon. However, if you're going to try this before they try to deport you, you should consult with a lawyer or somebody with experience in the MN pardon process to find out how much USCIS/ICE can stick their nose into it. You don't want to resurface on the immigration radar as a result of trying for a pardon, unless you know you have a really good chance of success.

Another option is to appeal it down to a lesser charge that can't bring deportation. I don't know if that's possible after you pleaded guilty, although their failure to inform you of the immigration consequences might help you succeed where other cases involving guilty pleas would fail.

Lessons learned for others: (1) If you ever plan to apply for citizenship, don't delay it for years after you become eligible. (2) If you have any kind of criminal record, even a misdemeanor, before you apply for citizenship make sure to consult an immigration lawyer (preferably more than one) to look over the details of your case and figure out the risks of deportation.

 

[Jackolantern]

And Lesson no. 3: If you want to commit financial fraud and get away with it, work on Wall Street and defraud billions of dollars. Don't mess around with thousands of dollars on Main Street because that will get you arrested.

 

[baikal3]

I just want to say "Thank You" very much to all those who responded. I will seek an immigration lawyer asap due to your comments/suggestions. It's unfortunate that one idiotic hindsight and the people at INS believe everybody is perfect but you (me). I guess they are and the first to cast stones because they're all perfect. *more like hypocrites.

I never realized about deportation because nobody ever mentions anything to me about the consequences of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor which is implied as an aggravated felony; which is deportable in the eyes of INS (which is news to me until this post).

What makes me sad about all this is that I'm married with 3 kids and fairly successful with life. Does this mean, the government is going ruin my life so they can take care of my kids and have taxpayers pay for my college loans that I haven't finished paying yet? And foreclosed on my 3 properties and default on the loans, and kick my family to the curb because I'm such an infidel for this one mishap?

What makes me more mad is I already have an idea (based on stories I've heard). I already know what's going to happen, eventually nothing. But what will happen, should it happen, is that they (INS) will ruin my life in attempt to deport me but since I'm a war refugee, that pathetic country where I was born will not accept me back. So I hang in limbo status for years. Eventually, they let me back out with no SSN#. This is a f*k'ed up immigration system. I can understand if I was a rapist or murderer, but an idiotic blue collar misdemeanor crime is deportable according to INS code? Is this some kind of a sick INS joke? *at INS, we take pride in changing lives; separating families across the globe because we have our head up our a$$.

Tangent ranting here, so what about my life that I gave to protect the freedom and rights of this country in Active Duty during Desert Storm? I guess even giving my life to protect this country would be deemed "immoral character" according to INS? What a bunch of bullsh*t!!

I guess I just need to be rich and buy my residency, INS is so f*ked up, according to the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 2011 edition: (since I'm new, I can't post URL links yet), you can find this article by Google'ing: "wall street journal more-super-rich-investors-get-us-citizenship"

Your ire is somewhat misdirected. The real problem in this case is not USCIS (INS no longer exists as it was split into USCIS and ICE some time after 9/11), but the immigration laws and the politicians who passed them.
USCIS does not just come up with all these rules out of thin air - the good moral character, aggravated felony stuff and so on are a part of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and USCIS is required to follow the law.
In many other situations the IO adjudication an N-400 petition has a considerable degree of discretion, but as far as aggravated felonies are concerned, their hands are tied. The INA contains a definitive prohibition (with no discretion given to the IO) against approving an N-400 application if the applicant has been convicted of a crime that qualifies as an aggravated felony under INA.

The notion of an aggravated felony was introduced in INA in 1988, but in the beginning it was rather limited and basically restricted to serious violent crimes. The definition of an aggravated felony was hugely expanded in 1996 by the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996" to include a great variety of non-violent crimes, including many crimes that are defined and prosecuted as misdemeanors by the states. The 1996 law was pushed by the Republicans in Congress, and some of its provisions were further tightened by the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act under George W. Bush.
The current immigration law is very harsh and unforgiving in many respects and often does not leave USCIS any discretion in what to do.
This is essentially what happened in your case.

So if you want to be angry at someone, by angry at the politicians who pushed all these draconian provisions into law.

 

[N400MD]

This is very complicated matter. It involves INA as well as criminal law. You would need to get an advise of an experienced in immigration AND criminal law attorney.
I would strongly suggest that you do NOT rely on ANY legal advise given to you here, on this public forum, or any other, especially when involving something serious and complicated as your case.

I am not an immigration attorney, so I can't and won't advise you what to do. What I write below is my brief and individual opinion.

In my opinion, you made one big mistake when you volunteered to trade in securities on behalf of other people. That's like providing medical services without having a license. No matter how well at it, you can get in big trouble , especially if any of the patients suffer complications and blame you for it. There are millions of unregulated trades, why pick one where you can be penalized?

It is very difficult, not sure if possible at all, to do anything in your situation until after legislative body in Congress passes a new law allowing for waivers or remedies in cases as yours.

This is not to say that you have absolutely zero options. In theory , you can be pardoned by the Governor or higher official and have the charge completely disappear from your record.

However, practically speaking, all you can do now is reach out to the very best lawyer you can get and see if there is any other way to help you.



Best regards.

 

[Jackolantern]

In my opinion, you made one big mistake when you volunteered to trade in securities on behalf of other people. That's like providing medical services without having a license.

This looks more like a joint arrangement, not "trading on behalf of other people". Like when people form a pool to buy a pile of lottery tickets. He lost his own money just like everybody else in the mix. The account was probably in his name, and the others ganged up to blame him, so the system threw the guilt on him.

But regardless of the legal penalties, I agree it indeed is a huge risk to mix money with other people like that.

 

[Incognegro]

Your ire is somewhat misdirected. The real problem in this case is not USCIS (INS no longer exists as it was split into USCIS and ICE some time after 9/11), but the immigration laws and the politicians who passed them.
USCIS does not just come up with all these rules out of thin air - the good moral character, aggravated felony stuff and so on are a part of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and USCIS is required to follow the law.
In many other situations the IO adjudication an N-400 petition has a considerable degree of discretion, but as far as aggravated felonies are concerned, their hands are tied. The INA contains a definitive prohibition (with no discretion given to the IO) against approving an N-400 application if the applicant has been convicted of a crime that qualifies as an aggravated felony under INA.

The notion of an aggravated felony was introduced in INA in 1988, but in the beginning it was rather limited and basically restricted to serious violent crimes. The definition of an aggravated felony was hugely expanded in 1996 by the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996" to include a great variety of non-violent crimes, including many crimes that are defined and prosecuted as misdemeanors by the states. The 1996 law was pushed by the Republicans in Congress, and some of its provisions were further tightened by the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act under George W. Bush.
The current immigration law is very harsh and unforgiving in many respects and often does not leave USCIS any discretion in what to do.
This is essentially what happened in your case.

So if you want to be angry at someone, by angry at the politicians who pushed all these draconian provisions into law.

well put baikal

 

[BigJoe5]

I'd be most angry with the "uncles" who asked for help and when thing didn't turn out well, sued their relative. We don't even do that in my highly dysfunctional family.

 

[N400MD]

This looks more like a joint arrangement, not "trading on behalf of other people".

Did they own joint account and did all participants actively engage in the trading or did they give him money to do trading on their behalf and distribute the shared earnings?
From what I have read it didn't look like former, but I leave the question open.

Like when people form a pool to buy a pile of lottery tickets.

N/A

He lost his own money just like everybody else in the mix. The account was probably in his name, and the others ganged up to blame him, so the system threw the guilt on him.

I intentionally left out the subject of "others" ganging up on the guy when things went south.

What matters now in legal terms is that the Securities Trading is a highly regulated trade. You just can't act as a stock broker for anyone unless you have passed FINRA GSR Exam and been designated a "Registered Representative". As OP learned, there are severe penalties for disregarding those regulations.

Had he borrowed, loaned or sold shares to finance company of his own, engaged in one of myriad of unregulated trades, there would be no repercussions whatsoever now. He could borrow million dollars to open a coffee-shop or a retail store and had it went bankrupt there would be no criminal liability, as long as he made good faith effort to run the enterprise as best as he could.

What he did is different: he took upon himself to accept the funds of others to engage in a trade that requires special registration to do it.

But regardless of the legal penalties, I agree it indeed is a huge risk to mix money with other people like that.

Risk in business is unavoidable. Anytime you invest your money in anything you risk losing it. What he did is something else.

==============================================================

To OP: Your best bet is to consult an experienced immigration attorney who is also very well versed in criminal law.

 

[Jackolantern]

What he did is different: he took upon himself to accept the funds of others to engage in a trade that requires special registration to do it.

We don't know the details of the case. It could have been the uncles who took it upon themselves to take his money.

Risk in business is unavoidable. Anytime you invest your money in anything you risk losing it. What he did is something else.

The huge risk here wasn't the loss of the investment. The informal nature of the arrangement created exposure beyond the loss of the invested money. With no formal contracts to specify who owns what, who does what, and without consulting a lawyer to determine what one can and cannot do, if things went south it would potentially open up a barrage of personal conflicts and lawsuits, even if nothing was illegal.

 

[N400MD]

We don't know the details of the case. It could have been the uncles who took it upon themselves to take his money.

No, we certainly don't know details or anything beyond what is posted by OP.
But what difference does it make now that he has criminal conviction and denied N-400 based on it?
In my opinion our guesses about the relationship of parties involved are irrelevant here, the current legal realities of his case is what matters ( # 1. Conviction, # 2. N-400 denied based on # 1.).

The huge risk here wasn't the loss of the investment. The informal nature of the arrangement created exposure beyond the loss of the invested money. With no formal contracts to specify who owns what, who does what, and without consulting a lawyer to determine what one can and cannot do, if things went south it would potentially open up a barrage of personal conflicts and lawsuits, even if nothing was illegal.

He would not be criminally liable for doing business without written contract. Few great business people are famous for doing business on a handshake and earned reputation for doing so. Others may find themselves in losing end, due to whatever infirmities and lack of character in one or another party. But that is not what got OP in his current impasse.
His undoing is the fact that he was found to have traded in securities for profit , a highly regulated trade, involving the funds of persons other than himself.
If he had 600 page written contract with his uncles, he could still be found guilty of his deed. You can't , for instance, render medical care or legal services without permission to do so from relevant authorities and will be found in breach of law even if the parties involved sign a contract with you.

What OP needs is a very good, well versed in INA and criminal laws attorney.

 

[Jackolantern]

He would not be criminally liable for doing business without written contract.

It's not the lack of a contract per se that would create the liability. The lack of a written contract increased the risks because it created a situation where the truth is harder to prevail because it's one person's word against the other.

f he had 600 page written contract with his uncles, he could still be found guilty of his deed.

Yes, depending on the facts. On the other hand, the contract could have clarified the roles of the individuals, showing that his uncles were the guilty ones, not him. Or made the uncles decide against bringing the case to court in the first place, due to how the content of the contract would implicate them.

After I started my own company I got an offer from an investor. If I took his money without a written contract, if the company failed I would have a greater risk of him claiming that I offered this and that when it wasn't true, and the court might believe him more than me because he's a rich guy with connections and powerful lawyers. Or if the company succeeds big he might claim more of an ownership stake than he's entitled to. The lack of a written contract creates a greater financial and legal risk, not because it's illegal to lack a written contract, but because without the contract the truth is harder to prove. That's why businesses create and sign written contracts even if it's not mandatory by law to have a written contract.

What OP needs is a very good, well versed in INA and criminal laws attorney.

I have no disagreement about that.

 

[N400MD]

It's not the lack of a contract per se that would create the liability. The lack of a written contract increased the risks because it created a situation where the truth is harder to prevail because it's one person's word against the other.

But this is not what got the OP convicted of a crime and denied of N-400. He wasn't found guilty [of Citizenship disqualifying offense] because of mere allegations of monetary loss in enterprise, but he was found guilty for trading in securities using the funds of other individuals. Something very serious that you shouldn't do, regardless of anyone's agreement, wish or consent.

He could well be very honest, well intentioned man who was , in his own mind, doing good for his uncles and helping himself and them make the money along the way. He may not have given a second thought to possibility of the relationship going sour.

If all above is 100% accurate what difference does it make now? He accepted his guilt and got convicted of crime in court of law. He was subsequently denied his N-400 as a consequence of conviction. He may now face more serious prospect of being charged as deportable alien. What he needs now is a legal advise and legal help, if any is conceivable at this point, not idle speculation about his and his uncles past behavior.
And the only place he should look for legal advise is the office of practicing attorney, preferably one with expertise, care and knowledge.

Yes, depending on the facts. On the other hand, the contract could have clarified the roles of the individuals, showing that his uncles were the guilty ones, not him. Or made the uncles decide against bringing the case to court in the first place, due to how the content of the contract would implicate them.

After I started my own company I got an offer from an investor. If I took his money without a written contract, if the company failed I would have a greater risk of him claiming that I offered this and that when it wasn't true, and the court might believe him more than me because he's a rich guy with connections and powerful lawyers. Or if the company succeeds big he might claim more of an ownership stake than he's entitled to. The lack of a written contract creates a greater financial and legal risk, not because it's illegal to lack a written contract, but because without the contract the truth is harder to prove. That's why businesses create and sign written contracts even if it's not mandatory by law to have a written contract.

See above.

I have no disagreement about that.

Good.

 

[Jackolantern]

But this is not what got the OP convicted of a crime and denied of N-400. He wasn't found guilty [of Citizenship disqualifying offense] because of mere allegations of monetary loss in enterprise, but he was found guilty for trading in securities using the funds of other individuals. Something very serious that you shouldn't do, regardless of anyone's agreement, wish or consent.

My point was that it's possible he didn't do what he was accused of -- it could be that the uncles were the guilty ones and not him. He said the uncles called him and convinced him to join them, not vice versa. But without a written contract showing their roles in it, he couldn't defend himself when multiple accusers took him to task.

If all above is 100% accurate what difference does it make now?

It doesn't make any difference to him now. The difference is to other people who might be reading this thread, so they know to get written contracts and consult a lawyer before engaging in any nontrivial financial arrangement with others.

 

[N400MD]

My point was that it's possible he didn't do what he was accused of -- it could be that the uncles were the guilty ones and not him. He said the uncles called him and convinced him to join them, not vice versa. But without a written contract showing their roles in it, he couldn't defend himself when multiple accusers took him to task.


It doesn't make any difference to him now. The difference is to other people who might be reading this thread, so they know to get written contracts and consult a lawyer before engaging in any nontrivial financial arrangement with others.

OP, among other things, claims that Prosecutor got him convicted because he FELT that OP was guilty of offering securities for sale. I doubt OP is fully accurate here. Prosecutor CAN NOT prove crime or guilt in Court of law based on his or her feelings. He must establish the fact and present evidence that would , beyond any reasonable doubt, confirm that the defendant indeed was guilty of crime alleged.

If uncles had a "Club" to which they invited him, sure there must be a record of the "Club" making investments prior to OP joining it. There must have been an account associated with the same as well. If one more person joined and added his funds to preexisting fund, then that's exactly what record of transactions would show (an increased amount of funds transferred from newly joined "member" of "Club" and so on). Uncles merely pointing fingers at the defendant could hardly establish his guilt in offering and selling THEM securities, while record would show them doing it prior his involvement , with him simply adding more funds to the pool.

There MUST have been some other evidence ( MAY BE he didn't just join a "Club" but accepted funds from his uncles to be invested in his own personal tradings account, or may be he was the individual making decisions on all transactions and the forensics analysis of his hard-drive had evidence of him being primarily involved in deciding what stocks to invest in, sell and trade and etc. Or may be there was some other evidence that OP didn't describe in his post).
Alternatively, he may have decided to accept the guilty plea just to be done with it , knowing full well he is not guilty at all ( very very very unreasonable and foolish act, if he indeed done so) .

In any event, his guilt must have been established in criminal court of law beyond any reasonable doubt, or else he wouldn't be in situation he is right now. And prime cause seems to be the conviction (whether established by fact or falsely admitted) of using other peoples' funds trading in securities without required registration.
He shouldn't have joined no "Clubs" and shouldn't have got himself involved in ANY securities trading, in any form , substance and nature with funds belonging to parties other than himself. Period. He did and got burned. And that's what matters for all legal purposes now.

The other people who read this thread and your posts could erroneously assume that by mere preparing and signing a written contract outlining responsibilities of parties they can get around unregistered securities trading charge and get into the "mutual funds" business. If this is what you imply, then you are multiplying the harm by giving the wrong ideas to other readers. If anything, other readers should learn NOT to get in any regulated trade without authorization or license.