Prositution Arrest-Dismissed, Visa stamping in Matamoros, Mexico!!

#1
Greetings to the board.
Background:
I was arrested in Jan 2011 in a prostitution sting, a class B misdemeanor here in Texas. I had legal representation and was given deferred adjudication with 6 months probation+40 hrs community service+AIDS Awareness class+fine during the initial hearing. Attorney tried to reason with DA on the charge in an effort to reduce the charges into a much less serious class C misdemeanor. That did not happen but the judge altered the conditions of punishment stating that if I make a financial donation to the local food bank that equals the 40 hrs community service at the minimum state wage levels , pay the stipulated fine given on the original punishment and take the AIDS class, the case will be dismissed with immediate effect and will not have to wait out the 6-month probation period. Needless to say I took care of all of that within one week and the case was dismissed. Our attorney has requested the court clerk to provide a court certified copy of the case disposition and I do have it in my possession at the moment. This is the only court certified document that I have. Other docs that my attorney provided were a copy(not certified) of the punishment offer during initial hearing, copies of police records documenting the arrest procedure, time, date location and list of officers involved in the sting etc...

Other than the above my record is clean. Initially came to this country on F1 in 2001 and been here since.

Current status:
I have an approved 140 under EB3 category and recently got I-797 approval for 7th year H1b extension. I'm thinking of heading to Matamoros, Mexico for stamping and was beginning to get worried on what to expect. I do fully realize that I need to answer YES for the arrest-related question on DS-160. From various forums online I learnt that even for people with no prior criminal history it sometimes takes more than a week to receive their stamped passports in Mexico. I'm a fulltime employee and not a consultant working on the CVE model.

What Iam worried about is if I would end up having to stay back in mexico for long before I get my visa.

I have gone through this forum and others for posts with such background, but most of them were not recent enough to fulfill my appetite for information. Hence wanted to make a port if users would share their experiences in this scenario. This is not to discount any posters from offering an advice or two under these circumstances.
 

Hexa

Registered Users (C)
#2
Prostitution sounds like CIMT to me. For the purpose of immigration, your dismissal is still considered as conviction because you were made to pay fines and take classes. Find out what the maximum jail time is for Texas Class B misdemeanor, if it's 1 year or less then you qualify for petty offense exception clause for CIMT.
 

ananga73

Registered Users (C)
#3
You have nothing to worry about. The BIA ruled [in 2008] that ONE count of solicitation of prostitution does not make a person inadmissible.

Cheers and stop playing with those hookers!:):)

http://www.justice.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol24/3613.pdf

A single act of soliciting prostitution on one’s own behalf does not fall within section 212(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(D)(ii) (2006), which provides for the inadmissibility of an alien who “procured . . . prostitutes
or persons for the purpose of prostitution.”


PS: A California Judge in the Ninth Circuit recently [2012] over ruled the BIA so its getting interesting FOR THOSE IN CALIFORNIA but for now, it stands.

http://immigrantpleas.com/b/category/grounds/cimt/



Greetings to the board.
Background:
I was arrested in Jan 2011 in a prostitution sting,........
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ananga73

Registered Users (C)
#4
Wrong. The BIA ruled that ONE count of solicitation of prostitution does not make a person inadmissible.

Prostitution sounds like CIMT to me. For the purpose of immigration, your dismissal is still considered as conviction because you were made to pay fines and take classes. Find out what the maximum jail time is for Texas Class B misdemeanor, if it's 1 year or less then you qualify for petty offense exception clause for CIMT.
 

Hexa

Registered Users (C)
#7
Hexa,

It is NOT. The Ninth Circuit was dealing with a California Specific issue California Penal Code § 647(b), and in any case at this point does not take precedence over the BIA nationwide.
You really need to read the document and learn more about U.S. justice system.

First of all, the The United States Court of Appeals is part of the federal court system, not state's. Immigration is a federal matter, so a state court in California has no jurisdiction over immigration matters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_courts_of_appeals

The Court of Appeals did not overrule the BIA, it actually agreed with it and denied Rohit's petition. The BIA's latest decision is to consider any solicitation for prostitution as CIMT, even if it's only committed once. Rohit tried to argue that a single conviction of solicitation for prostitution is not CIMT, but the Court agreed with the BIA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ananga73

Registered Users (C)
#8
Cut the semantics and pomposity, everybody with any knowledge whatsoever of immigration knows its a federal matter.

Read the exact wording of my response to him. I talked about admissibility, deportability, and one count of solicitation. I did not talk about whether solicitation is a CIMT.

One count of solicitation is not considered a deportable or inadmissible offense. The operative phrase is ONE count.

In the case by the Ninth Circuit Court that you site, they conclude:

Because Rohit was convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude, he was deportable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), and we deny his petition for review.


You really need to read the document and learn more about U.S. justice system.

First of all, the The United States Court of Appeals is part of the federal court system, not state's. Immigration is a federal matter, so a state court in California has no jurisdiction over immigration matters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_courts_of_appeals

The Court of Appeals did not overrule the BIA, it actually agreed with it and denied Rohit's petition. The BIA's latest decision is to consider any solicitation for prostitution as CIMT, even if it's only committed once. Rohit tried to argue that a single conviction of solicitation for prostitution is not CIMT, but the Court agreed with the BIA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hexa

Registered Users (C)
#9
You barged in and gave a very strong 'wrong' response to my post, and I'm the one who is being pompous? It is all about semantics because Congress does not define specifically what 'moral turpitude' means.

Did you actually read the ruling comprehensively instead of simply looking for points to shore up your mistaken argument?

Rohit argued exactly like you did, that a single count of solicitation is only CIMT if it's repeated, to which the federal judge said:
Rohit argues that solicitation of prostitution is not analo- gous to prostitution because prostitution often involves repeated acts of prostitution. This argument does not persuade us for two reasons. First, we owe Chevron deference to the Board’s decision in W., where it held that an ordinance that criminalized a single act of prostitution dealt with a crime involving moral turpitude. 4 I. & N. Dec. at 401-02, 404. Rohit offers no authority for the proposition that acts of pros- titution are only morally turpitudinous if repeated. If a single act of prostitution involves moral turpitude, there is no reason why a single act of solicitation of prostitution does not.

Second, a crime that does not involve moral turpitude does not become a crime involving moral turpitude through repeti- tion. See Matter of Short, 20 I. & N. Dec. 136, 139 (Bd. Immigration Appeals 1989) (“Moral turpitude cannot be viewed to arise from some undefined synergism by which two offenses are combined to create a crime involving moral tur- pitude, where each crime individually does not involve moral turpitude.”). So whether solicitation of prostitution involves moral turpitude does not depend on how frequently a person engages in the act.
If you know this is a federal court, why do you insist it's just for California? Unless the definitions of 'solicitation for prostitution' in other states are much broader than California's (which is highly unlikely), this is a new precedent binding for all immigration cases.

Rohit tried to get the federal judge declare that solicitation is not CIMT. If he were successful with that, he would only have one CIMT for dissuading a witness, which is probably a lesser misdemeanor that would fall under the petty offense exception for CIMT. If he has one petty offense CIMT and one non-CIMT misdemeanor, he is safe because it takes 3 non-CIMT (or petty CIMT) misdemeanors to make one inadmissible.

Since the judge ruled that a single count of solicitation is CIMT, rohit accumulated two CIMT offenses, which meant game over for him.
 
#10
Thanks for the responses so far. Interesting reads those. It appears that it may be hit or miss with respect to a successful stamping under the circumstances. I'll keep researching some more.

I'd like to add here that I was photographed and fingerprinted immediately following the arrest. Is this something I have to worry about in the sense that I'll be stuck for longer in Mexico if the adjudicating officer decides to wait for FBI fingerprint check results?

I do fully understand that even though the case was effectively dismissed, it is still a conviction from an immigration standpoint. I'm also aware that the offense constitutes a CIMT, although I may qualify for the petty offense exception. Even the immigration attorney that I have retained kept reiterating that fact. However, the net outcome of the stamping visit is purely at the interviewing officer's discretion and how he reads the court disposition relative to the rest of the facts of my case.

I have also confirmed from a criminal attorney here that the max jail time for this offense in Texas is 6 months. I'm eligible and have applied for "Texas Order of Disclosure" to seal my arrest record, being fully aware at this point that it can still be seen by immigration, LE and other governmental agencies. I'm doing this purely from a future employment, rental and housing applications etc perspective.

Again, thanks for the valuable feedback. Others can chime in if they have any more to add.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hexa

Registered Users (C)
#12
Your both wrong, it is not a CIMT. It is it's own crime under 212(a)(2)(D)(i), and maybe under (ii) and (iii)
So the Federal Judge and the BIA got it wrong? You might want to take a look again at the definitions.

212(a)(2)(D)(i) criminalizes engaging in prostitution. In simple English: becoming a prostitute. He was not the prostitute.
212(a)(2)(D)(ii) criminalized procuring prostitution. In simple English: becoming a pimp. He was not the pimp.
212(a)(2)(D)(iii) criminalized coming to the united states for commercialized vice. Unless they can prove he specifically came to USA to find prostitutes, he can't be charged with this.
 
#13
What is teh final outcome of your case?

Thanks for the responses so far. Interesting reads those. It appears that it may be hit or miss with respect to a successful stamping under the circumstances. I'll keep researching some more.
.

Can you share your final result? Did you run into any trouble in POE?
 
#14
Can green card travel outside of US after convicted with only one count of soliciting prostitution

I run into similar situation, and have done some research. Here is my conclusion and I believe other people in my situation can benefit from our discussion if they see this post. So any comment is much appreciate.


Background:
State/Country relating to question: Minnesota
Additional information to your question: I has green card since 06-16-2008 and have been in US since 1996 Mar (F1) and changed to H1 in 2000. My last travel outside of US is 04-23-2008 with AP document. I was arrested on Jan 16, 2013 and charged with gross misdemeanor of soliciting prostitution in MN. The case is not final yet. The current deal is to plea guilty for the charge of misdemeanor of soliciting prostitution imposes max 90 days jail and/or 1000 fine, but the deal is no jail time and just pay fine and take classes. I will take this deal.


My conclusion:
With the single act of soliciting prostitution convicted with misdemeanor (max jail 90 days and/or 1000 fine), I am not deportable, nor inadmissible. Means I can stay in US and travel outside of US, because of:

1. single act of soliciting prostitution is not CIMT and is not a ground of inadmissibility or deportation. See Matter of Gonzalez-Zoquiapan, 24 I&N Dec. 549 (BIA 2008), wherein the court found that a single act of soliciting prostitution on one's own behalf does not fall within section 212(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

2. Adjustment of Status Following an Admission Does Not “Re-Start” the Five-Year Clock for Purposes of the Moral Turpitude Deportation Ground, seeMatter of Alyazji, 25 I&N Dec. 397 (BIA 2011), so the date my status changed to LPR is not the date of admission.

3. My re-entering into US via AP (advance parole) is not a new admission according to INA: ACT 101 - DEFINITIONS "An alien who is paroled under section 212(d)(5) or permitted to land temporarily as an alien crewman shall not be considered to have been admitted."
Thus, the date of my admission is the admission date before my re-enter via AP.

4. soliciting prostitution is not same as "prostitution".

My analysis is based on:
1. if it is CIMT
2. if it is within 5 years of admission
3. if it is in petty offense exception
4. if it is "prostitution"

My summary is:
1. my crime is not CIMT.
2. my crime is not within 5 years of admission.
3. my crime falls into petty offense exception
4. my crime is not "prostitution".

Thus, I am not deportable, and not inadmissible.

Please comment on my summary.
 

TheRealCanadian

Volunteer Moderator
#15
If you know this is a federal court, why do you insist it's just for California? Unless the definitions of 'solicitation for prostitution' in other states are much broader than California's (which is highly unlikely), this is a new precedent binding for all immigration cases.
Circuit Court rulings are not binding outside that particular circuit.
 
#17
Can green card travel outside of US after convicted with only one count of soliciting prostitution

I run into similar situation, and have done some research. Here is my conclusion and I believe other people in my situation can benefit from our discussion if they see this post. So any comment is much appreciate.


Background:
State/Country relating to question: Minnesota
Additional information to your question: I has green card since 06-16-2008 and have been in US since 1996 Mar (F1) and changed to H1 in 2000. My last travel outside of US is 04-23-2008 with AP document. I was arrested on Jan 16, 2013 and charged with gross misdemeanor of soliciting prostitution in MN. The case is not final yet. The current deal is to plea guilty for the charge of misdemeanor of soliciting prostitution imposes max 90 days jail and/or 1000 fine, but the deal is no jail time and just pay fine and take classes. I will take this deal.


My conclusion:
With the single act of soliciting prostitution convicted with misdemeanor (max jail 90 days and/or 1000 fine), I am not deportable, nor inadmissible. Means I can stay in US and travel outside of US, because of:

1. single act of soliciting prostitution is not CIMT and is not a ground of inadmissibility or deportation. See Matter of Gonzalez-Zoquiapan, 24 I&N Dec. 549 (BIA 2008), wherein the court found that a single act of soliciting prostitution on one's own behalf does not fall within section 212(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

2. Adjustment of Status Following an Admission Does Not “Re-Start” the Five-Year Clock for Purposes of the Moral Turpitude Deportation Ground, seeMatter of Alyazji, 25 I&N Dec. 397 (BIA 2011), so the date my status changed to LPR is not the date of admission.

3. My re-entering into US via AP (advance parole) is not a new admission according to INA: ACT 101 - DEFINITIONS "An alien who is paroled under section 212(d)(5) or permitted to land temporarily as an alien crewman shall not be considered to have been admitted."
Thus, the date of my admission is the admission date before my re-enter via AP.

4. soliciting prostitution is not same as "prostitution".

My analysis is based on:
1. if it is CIMT
2. if it is within 5 years of admission
3. if it is in petty offense exception
4. if it is "prostitution"

My summary is:
1. my crime is not CIMT.
2. my crime is not within 5 years of admission.
3. my crime falls into petty offense exception
4. my crime is not "prostitution".

Thus, I am not deportable, and not inadmissible.

Please comment on my summary.

Hello Roxie, your details is really helpful . unfortunately I have gotten myself into a similar situation and need some guidance.

1) What was your final conclusion of admission date . I have my GC from July 2011 , I had recently travelled and entered U.S in Sep 2016 . Unfortunately got charged on feb 2017 . So what will be my addmission date ?
2) If I get convicted will I be ever able to travel outside of US on my GC ? This is my only charge and I don't have any criminal record/charge in the past
3) Should I wait for 5 yr before applying for Citizenship ? or it doesn't matter ?
 
Top