• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

Police check showed an offence on my husband record help please

thirdtimelucky said:
@Britsimon one last thing please ( and i know i'm being cheeky even asking it ) but is there any way one can get their case fasttracked ?
Click to expand...
No, or everyone would do it and case numbers would be meaningless. Until your case number is published in the visa bulletin you aren't even assured of an interview.
 
n.n. said:
http://www.uscis.gov/i-601

But may be the crime of your husband is not "Moral turpitude" crime and this is not necessary.
Also, if this crime happened before he was 18 years old, then this also should not be necessary

Otherwise, as far as I know, he should apply for waiver.
Click to expand...

Even if the crime were to be a CMIT, applying for a waiver will not be of any use in view of the fact that the OP cannot apply for a waiver ahead of his/her interview. One would need to attend the interview and be found inadmissible before a waiver of inadmissibility can be filed - there's no time for waiver filing in DV cases.

In addition, before one can file a waiver to overcome inadmissibility based on having committed a CMIT, one of the following conditions MUST be established:
  • You are inadmissible only because of your participation in prostitution, including having procured others for prostitution or having received the proceeds of prostitution, but you have been rehabilitated and your admission to the United States will not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security;
  • At least 15 years have passed since the activity or event that makes you inadmissible, you have been rehabilitated, and your admission to the United States will not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security;
  • Your qualifying U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident relative (spouse, son, daughter, parent), or K visa petitioner would experience extreme hardship if you were denied admission; or
  • You are an approved VAWA self-petitioner.
Applying for a waiver is not as easy/straightforward as it may sound.
 
thirdtimelucky said:
@Britsimon thank you so so much for sharing that document. Phew...huge relief. I checked again and it was possession and not "receiving" so very glad that i asked the question.
my last worry is that my case number is VERY high ie AFxxx40*** which means that if trouble arises and a waiver is in fact required...it may be too close in terms of the Sept deadline looming.
Do you have info on the waiver process and do you think i should get an immi attorney JUST in case ?
this is a once in a lifetime opportunity so will do anything to make sure i've done my best.
Click to expand...

You will just have to take your chance in front of the CO, I'm afraid. Like Simon already pointed out, "Possession of stolen good"isn't considered CMIT, but the final say is really in the hands of the CO at the end of the day.

If your husband ends up being found inadmissible, a waiver wouldn't be of any use to him because of the time factor involved with DV cases. You cannot file a waiver without being found inadmissible, and to be found inadmissible, an interview has to take place first. Waiver filing is a long drawn out process, and I'm convinced it wouldn't be approved in this case even if time wasn't of essence. I wouldn't recommend hiring an immigration lawyer "just in case", however I don't think it's a bad idea to consult with one ahead of time just to get further clarifications on what could be considered CMIT. The lawyer will need to actually see the court records in order to be of any use IMHO.
 
Just to conclude from my personal experience common assault is not a CMIT. I went to the interview and the officer said its not a crime in America so guys relax if you do have it on your police check don't panic at all they didn't even question what happened :)
 
Sm1smom said:
Dalia2015 Thank you mom but In this document that you refer to there is nothing about common assault!!
I read the 23 pages and didn't see any mention of common assault. I am sorry if I am asking too much.

You may need to read the document again because I believe the quoted section below addresses your case (replace "common" with "simple"):

Crimes committed against the person, family relationship, or sexual morality which do not involve moral turpitude include:

  1. Assault (simple) (i.e., any assault, which does not require an evil intent or depraved motive, although it may involve the use of a weapon, which is neither dangerous nor deadly);

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf (p.6)




​
Click to expand...
Thank you @Sm1smom for everything . I really appreciate it. Wishing you all the best:)
 
Dalia2015 said:
Just to conclude from my personal experience common assault is not a CMIT. I went to the interview and the officer said its not a crime in America so guys relax if you do have it on your police check don't panic at all they didn't even question what happened :)
Click to expand...

Congratulations! Welcome to the US! :)
 
hello @Britsimon ....I'm back. Asking the same question...just this time with stress seeping out of every pore and a headache from head to toe. I have back pain too.
So heres the story ....
In South Africa there is no differentiation between "receiving stolen goods " and "being in possession of presumed stolen goods".
my husband 15 years ago had a conviction. The record has been expunged but we still need to "fess " up that conviction as it happened.
I'm stressed. I cant find a definition of CIMT ( the link above no longer works) and I have spent hours googling but cant find anything.
I saw a stat today that 85% of people with a CIMT are declined :(
I don't know what to do. Please say something to make me feel better ....any advice appreciated.
 
thirdtimelucky said:
hello @Britsimon ....I'm back. Asking the same question...just this time with stress seeping out of every pore and a headache from head to toe. I have back pain too.
So heres the story ....
In South Africa there is no differentiation between "receiving stolen goods " and "being in possession of presumed stolen goods".
my husband 15 years ago had a conviction. The record has been expunged but we still need to "fess " up that conviction as it happened.
I'm stressed. I cant find a definition of CIMT ( the link above no longer works) and I have spent hours googling but cant find anything.
I saw a stat today that 85% of people with a CIMT are declined :(
I don't know what to do. Please say something to make me feel better ....any advice appreciated.
Click to expand...
On your question regarding definition: the term CIMT "is not defined under federal law, courts in the United States have defined it generally as an act that is inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality and the duties owed between persons or to society in general". See respective USCIS information posted:
https://my.uscis.gov/helpcenter/article/what-is-a-crime-involving-moral-turpitude
 
EURO2014 said:
On your question regarding definition: the term CIMT "is not defined under federal law, courts in the United States have defined it generally as an act that is inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality and the duties owed between persons or to society in general". See respective USCIS information posted:
https://my.uscis.gov/helpcenter/article/what-is-a-crime-involving-moral-turpitude
Click to expand...
thanks...saw that.
Just wanted someone to say that if 15 years has passed and record expunged etc that it is okay.....
 
thirdtimelucky said:
thanks...saw that.
Just wanted someone to say that if 15 years has passed and record expunged etc that it is okay.....
Click to expand...
Sorry, we are legally prevented from providing this type of legal advice. Hence the respective "seek out attorney" advice USCIS posted on their website. Good luck!
PS: possibly you may find this information of help, though: http://dyanwilliamslaw.com/2015/09/immigration-consequences-of-criminal-offenses-myths-facts/ (see point 2 etc.).
 
Last edited:
thirdtimelucky said:
thanks...saw that.
Just wanted someone to say that if 15 years has passed and record expunged etc that it is okay.....
Click to expand...

I know of someone, also from SA, with a similar conviction and expunged record albeit it was longer than 15 years before and he got a DV visa, no problem. I would not provide legal advice but I would certainly say there should be hope for you...
 
SusieQQQ said:
I know of someone, also from SA, with a similar conviction and expunged record albeit it was longer than 15 years before and he got a DV visa, no problem. I would not provide legal advice but I would certainly say there should be hope for you...
Click to expand...
Thank you so much @SusieQQQ .....I was absolutely convinced that we were going to be okay ( not sure what convinced me of that ) and now ...just hours before the interview...I'm a wreck !
thank you for telling me about the person with a similar story....I certainly hope ours goes this way too.
Will let you know outcome .
 
EURO2014 said:
Sorry, we are legally prevented from providing this type of legal advice. Hence the respective "seek out attorney" advice USCIS posted on their website. Good luck!
PS: possibly you may find this information of help, though: http://dyanwilliamslaw.com/2015/09/immigration-consequences-of-criminal-offenses-myths-facts/ (see point 2 etc.).
Click to expand...

There is nothing that I am aware of that "legally prevents" us from giving advice Euro - I have no idea what you mean. Now - we may choose (as individuals) to not give advice and people should be aware that we are just a bunch of people giving nothing more than opinions (some educated opinions, some not). But "legally prevented"? No.
 
thirdtimelucky said:
hello @Britsimon ....I'm back. Asking the same question...just this time with stress seeping out of every pore and a headache from head to toe. I have back pain too.
So heres the story ....
In South Africa there is no differentiation between "receiving stolen goods " and "being in possession of presumed stolen goods".
my husband 15 years ago had a conviction. The record has been expunged but we still need to "fess " up that conviction as it happened.
I'm stressed. I cant find a definition of CIMT ( the link above no longer works) and I have spent hours googling but cant find anything.
I saw a stat today that 85% of people with a CIMT are declined :(
I don't know what to do. Please say something to make me feel better ....any advice appreciated.
Click to expand...

OK - as others have said, the definition of CIMT is somewhat vague. There is a good link below that makes a lot of sense about how a crime is considered a CIMT or not. Ultimately, each case is different and the decision of whether someone is inadmissable because of a certain crime is up to the CO, or their supervisors.

In the case you have described you are right to "fess up". Being up front/transparent about the issue is very important. The other important thing is to prepare yourselves for the interview by gathering documentation about the conviction, the circumstances and so on. With crimes involving possession of stolen property, I believe the linked article is accurate in differentiating that a key element is knowledge. Knowingly receiving stolen goods is a heck of a lot different to unknowingly receiving stolen goods. If the latter case is the case (and can be shown with documentation about the conviction) then I would be surprised if this conviction caused an issue to your immigration process.

http://shusterman.com/pdf/cmt04.pdf
 
Britsimon said:
There is nothing that I am aware of that "legally prevents" us from giving advice Euro - I have no idea what you mean. Now - we may choose (as individuals) to not give advice and people should be aware that we are just a bunch of people giving nothing more than opinions (some educated opinions, some not). But "legally prevented"? No.
Click to expand...
Oh, there are many prohibitions in both state and federal law on this point. As just one example, an excerpt from Georgia State law:
"15-19-51 Unauthorized practice of law prohibited.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person other than a duly licensed attorney at law:
(1) To practice or appear as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any court of this state or before any judicial body;
(2) To make it a business to practice as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any of such courts;
(3) To hold himself out to the public or otherwise to any person as being entitled to practice law;
(4) To render or furnish legal services or advice;
(5) To furnish attorneys or counsel;
(6) To render legal services of any kind in actions or proceedings of any nature;
(7) To assume or use or advertise the title of “lawyer,” “attorney,” “attorney at law,” or equivalent terms in any language in such manner as to convey the impression that he is entitled to practice law or is entitled to furnish legal advice, services, or counsel; or
(8) To advertise that either alone or together with, by, or through any person, whether a duly and regularly admitted attorney at law or not, he has, owns, conducts, or maintains an office for the practice of law or for furnishing legal advice, services, or counsel." (highlighting included).
In my practice as Business Consultant it is mandatory to make 100% clear that I am not providing legal advice to my clients in any form or shape.
 
EURO2014 said:
Oh, there are many prohibitions in both state and federal law on this point. As just one example, an excerpt from Georgia State law:
"15-19-51 Unauthorized practice of law prohibited.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person other than a duly licensed attorney at law:
(1) To practice or appear as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any court of this state or before any judicial body;
(2) To make it a business to practice as an attorney at law for any person other than himself in any of such courts;
(3) To hold himself out to the public or otherwise to any person as being entitled to practice law;
(4) To render or furnish legal services or advice;
(5) To furnish attorneys or counsel;
(6) To render legal services of any kind in actions or proceedings of any nature;
(7) To assume or use or advertise the title of “lawyer,” “attorney,” “attorney at law,” or equivalent terms in any language in such manner as to convey the impression that he is entitled to practice law or is entitled to furnish legal advice, services, or counsel; or
(8) To advertise that either alone or together with, by, or through any person, whether a duly and regularly admitted attorney at law or not, he has, owns, conducts, or maintains an office for the practice of law or for furnishing legal advice, services, or counsel." (highlighting included).
In my practice as Business Consultant it is mandatory to make 100% clear that I am not providing legal advice to my clients in any form or shape.
Click to expand...

No one here is pretending to be an attorney.
And you've personally given plenty of advice without disclaimers before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top