N-335 Denial Letter Fight it or Options?

[Jackolantern]

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) .

It's not uncommon for an innocent person to plead guilty to a misdemeanor that comes without prison time, in order to avoid the risk of being convicted of something worse with years in prison. Especially when they have multiple accusers, and don't have hard evidence to exonerate themselves.

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.

You are conveniently ignoring 2 important things that I previously mentioned: (1) if he actually didn't do anything illegal, the written contract could have shown that his uncles were the wrongdoers and not him. In such a situation, the contract would have hurt the uncles, so the contract isn't going to absolve wrongdoers of their guilt; the contract is to help the innocent to prove the truth. And (2) a lawyer should be consulted before pooling nontrivial funds with anybody for anything (in a situation like this, the lawyer would either advise against the arrangement or direct them to get the appropriate licenses).

 

[N400MD]

It's not uncommon for an innocent person to plead guilty to a misdemeanor that comes without prison time, in order to avoid the risk of being convicted of something worse with years in prison. Especially when they have multiple accusers, and don't have hard evidence to exonerate themselves.

You don't need hard evidence to exonerate yourself ( you don't have to prove non-existence). It is the accusing party that needs the hard evidence to convict you of crime.

While many unwitting people can be victimized by desire to avoid intimidating experience of trial and criminal proceedings, for a man who had honorably served his country in war it would be unbecoming to be intimidated by its' justice system.

How do you intimidate a guy who flew F-22's over the enemy line of anti-aircraft fire with the hassle of sitting in the court room and defending himself of false charges?
I find it hard to imagine.

Nor do I think he is a man of low intelligence (you can't get into Air Force with low aptitude test results. You may qualify for infantry but never AF).
Therefore, I doubt this as a likely reason for the guilty plea as well.

If he is innocent and did plea guilty,then it would most likely be due to his unwillingness to bother with the any hassle than being intimidated of standing a trial.
Now, especially if innocent, he will learn a handy lesson how wrong he was.

But, again, I somewhat doubt his total innocence. I mean I am open to consider that he may have had no ill intentions ,acted in good faith and wanted to do his best for all involved while his uncles were bad guys who decided to sacrifice him to get their money back, however, it doesn't negate the fact that he engaged in trading of securities without passing required exam and getting registration. Surely he didn't just sit there and watch as his uncles traded his funds and later accepted a guilty plea for what they did and accused him of doing? Unfortunately for OP, this is one of the strictly regulated trades with severe (as evident from his story) consequences for those who are found in breach.

You are conveniently ignoring 2 important things that I previously mentioned: (1) if he actually didn't do anything illegal, the written contract could have shown that his uncles were the wrongdoers and not him. In such a situation, the contract would have hurt the uncles, so the contract isn't going to absolve wrongdoers of their guilt; the contract is to help the innocent to prove the truth. And (2) a lawyer should be consulted before pooling nontrivial funds with anybody for anything (in a situation like this, the lawyer would either advise against the arrangement or direct them to get the appropriate licenses).

(1). You can't engage in certain trades without special license or registration.That includes, for comparative example, the medical industry. You can't just get few of your buddies together, write a contract and lay on table to operate each other in the basement of your house. No matter the extent of involvement or mutual agreement to conduct the surgery, each and every one of the participants is guilty of the unlawful practice of medicine. Same with securities trading, no matter how you put it, if he was involved in buying and selling the stocks with the funds of other individuals for profit he is automatically guilty of that deed. There is no way around it, no matter how many pages of paper you waste to write a contract on it.

(2). There are two types of trades, regulated and unregulated.

A. If the trade is unregulated there is no restriction to engage and no mandate to have a written contract to loan the money and offer shares. In fact, if you have a good , trusting relationship a very close person may take it as an insult if you insist on putting it on paper. Of course, for all practical purposes, to avoid unwanted losses and considering we live in XXI century and not in the age of gentlemen of honor, it is most advisable and prudent to put everything in writing, but it is not something you must do or face jail.

B. If the trade is regulated and you lack the license to perform then , regardless of anything else, you simply CAN NOT engage in it and if you do then you must be ready to face the consequences.

 

[sanjoseaug20]

Interesting discussion, but since the points are being repeated over and over, I wanted to divert it in a different direction.

So lets assume the worst case that CIS files for deportation. Assuming OP has a USC spouse. Not sure if OP is a he/she, so I will go gender neutral. Could he/she petition a new green card for him? Is the bar to naturalization specific to this green card, or is it specific to his current circumstance / green card?

In OP's second comment, I did not understand the reference to letting back in with NO SSN !!

I also did not understand the reference to the pathetic country not accepting you ... you obviously renewed their passport since gaining adult-hood, or did you never travel outside US? Sorry I am being picky, but it helps to be accurate. Unless you came in as refugee, you are a citizen of that country, and while you may not relate to them, they will have to take you back.

 

[N400MD]

Buh, aren't we geneder neutral? How touchy-feely..
Anywho, the OP served in AF during war, too unlikely to be a female , US Miliary does distinguish between sexes and does not allow women to serve in combat or life endangering positions. So, most likely OP is a guy.


If the alien is found deportable due to crime committed, his filing a new petition through other grounds of eligibility won't alter the grounds of deportability.

Because he is a refugee, he thinks he may be released out of detention without immigration status (if held for deportation) due to refusal by his country to accept him back. That's what he probably means by 'letting back without SSN'.

As a refugee he may be eligible for Withholding of Deportation under CAT , which will give him permission to work and stay indefinitely, but it sucks majorly because he will never be able to adjust his status, travel outside US and can be removed at any time in future.

 

[Dago Red]

@phoenix5

First of all - Thank you for your service for our country. There might be a solution for your case. Every member of congress has the right to bring in a "special bill" or "private bill" to grant proper status to any person. You probably can contact one of your senators' office and ask for support. They have the power to help you.

@sanjoseaug20

No, just because you're a citizen of a country does not mean they will take you back. There are a few African countries for example who refuse to tack citizen back if they are forced out of some Western European countries. It all depends on the agreements between countries.

 

[sanjoseaug20]

I am sorry N400 but there were so many posts between you and Jack that I wanted to save my time by skimming through and see what issues were not already covered. I do not know what was the need to react in terms of touchy...

 

[N400MD]

I am sorry N400 but there were so many posts between you and Jack that I wanted to save my time by skimming through and see what issues were not already covered. I do not know what was the need to react in terms of touchy...

You seem to have paid attention to nothing and just wanted to show off how gender neutral you are, hence the reply you've got.
The OP said plainly that he arrived here as a refugee. You still suggest that "Unless you came in as refugee, you are a citizen of that country".
FYI, being refugee doesn't mean one is no longer a Citizen of the country one came from. AG can, in his discretion, remove person back to where they came from (so says the statute).
However, there are two issues involved in doing so:
1. Assuming this guy is a refugee, sending him back to where he came from would subject him to persecution he fled from (unless there was significant change of conditions since his arrival). Therefore, he may still be able to qualify for WD under CAT (withholding of deportation ) and remain in US indefinitely, with EAD but no prospect of adjustment of status or travel abroad.
It should be noted that it is very difficult to qualify for WD, as burden on alien is decidedly higher than just preponderance of evidence standard.
2. There are SOME countries out there that do NOT accept their Citizens back, regardless of what their status here is or was. I don't know where the OP is from, but I do know that in cases involving countries that don't accept back their former citizens, the common course of action is lengthy detention which ends with either:
a) ICE letting person out of detention (until the place to remove can be found). In such cases, the individual, even though let out, is accorded absolutely no status or privilege or right, they simply allowed out of detention because there is no prospect of removal.
b) In some cases , where lengthy detention is too long, the Habeas Corpus is filed and decided by Court that has a jurisdiction to decide.
The OP should also be aware that there is currently a Bill introduced in the House that MAY pass some day, if not as separate legislation then as part of amendment to some omnibus bill, which would allow indefinite detention in cases where the country of origin refuses to accept the alien. This is a serious matter to consider to all who lack status and come from countries that do not accept them back.

 

[sanjoseaug20]

You seem to have paid attention to nothing and just wanted to show off how gender neutral you are, hence the reply you've got.

Last response on this topic ... and I had to respond because you seem to be taking an issue for no reason, but having said that, I do not intend to repeat myself.
Sometimes in a hurry you are trying to frame an issue as well as debating some questions in your mind, and they all spill through the keyboard.
I am sorry I do not know how to prove I was really trying to save time, and add something valuable. Maybe I failed. My apologies to all.
But you also have to read through the 20 posts between you and Jack to see how you might have confused people.