Should I apply for citizenship w/a recent DUI?

mpatel79

New Member
I have been a resident alien since May 2000. My only issue is that in Jan. 2005, I received a DUI. There was no accident/injury to anyone and my BAC was .10. B/c of that, I received the typical plea (30 days suspended, fine, 1 year restricted license, classes). I completed all requirements and probation. I am now applying for citizenship and am wondering if this will have effect on my application or if this is something I should worry about. Besides this, my record is completely clean(only some minor traffic violations). Is this something I need to be concerned about for the "good moral character" requirement of the citizenship application? Should I wait longer before I apply?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
does not seem you would pass the good moral character section since your DUI was recent offense.
 
Speak to an attorney

I would suggest tha you speak to am attorney.

In fact one of the very important things is that in the first place when you had a DUI you should have got an attorney (good one) and tried to cut a deal. That is very important if you are planning to immigrate.

Do you know that on a DUI conviction sometimes H1's can be revoked and you maybe asked to leave.

That being said, just recently a Mexican immigrant in Florida was charged with DUI and Dept of homeland security tried to deport him. However he sued and finally in the florida supreme court they ruled that it does not warrent deportation only negligance...

Sometimes they ask you to plead guilty, but you have to understand the long term effects on you before accepting such quick deals that is ok for citizens...
 
I am a GC holder so H1 revocation isn't an issue. And VA is really tough on DUIs so I could only get the "standard" plea deal. How much longer should I wait?
 
That being said, just recently a Mexican immigrant in Florida was charged with DUI and Dept of homeland security tried to deport him. However he sued and finally in the florida supreme court they ruled that it does not warrent deportation only negligance...



Maybe I am wrong, but Immigration law is federal law. Why would the Florida Supreme Court stop a deportation order? That issue can only be resolved by a federal judge.

Can you cite the law that allows state courts to stop a deportation order?


thanks,

Newly
 
NewlyMinted said:
That being said, just recently a Mexican immigrant in Florida was charged with DUI and Dept of homeland security tried to deport him. However he sued and finally in the florida supreme court they ruled that it does not warrent deportation only negligance...



Maybe I am wrong, but Immigration law is federal law. Why would the Florida Supreme Court stop a deportation order? That issue can only be resolved by a federal judge.

Can you cite the law that allows state courts to stop a deportation order?


thanks,

Newly

Hi Newly,

I am sure the Florida judicial system, in this case, the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, does not challenge the deportation order or the pertinent federal law. I think what the court did is challenging Florida state law, or the way it was interpreted by the local jurisdication who charged him with a DUI.

Meaning, if the lower courts in Florida "misinterpreted" Florida's DUI statutes, then the deportation order is irrelevant, as it was based on an incorrect application of Florida law.

Cheers!
 
LegalAlien99 said:
Hi Newly,

I am sure the Florida judicial system, in this case, the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, does not challenge the deportation order or the pertinent federal law. I think what the court did is challenging Florida state law, or the way it was interpreted by the local jurisdication who charged him with a DUI.

Meaning, if the lower courts in Florida "misinterpreted" Florida's DUI statutes, then the deportation order is irrelevant, as it was based on an incorrect application of Florida law.

Cheers!


Hi LegalAlien99,

What you said make sense, but that's not what is at issue here. What I got from Xkuger's post is that the Florida Supreme Court said that deportation is too harsh of a punishment for DUI. If that's the case, then it is not to the state court to decide such an issue.

If the Florida Supreme Court overruled Florida's DUI law, that's another matter and that would render the deportation order moot because his deportation order was based on a faulty law.

Maybe the Court had issues with the way the DUI test was conducted. That could be why it said to charge him with negligence, instead of DUI.

Maybe Xkuger can clarify the issue for us.

My question is, doesn't that reflect on his moral character?



Newly
 
NewlyMinted said:
Hi LegalAlien99,

What you said make sense, but that's not what is at issue here. What I got from Xkuger's post is that the Florida Supreme Court said that deportation is too harsh of a punishment for DUI. If that's the case, then it is not to the state court to decide such an issue.

If the Florida Supreme Court overruled Florida's DUI law, that's another matter and that would render the deportation order moot because his deportation order was based on a faulty law.

Maybe the Court had issues with the way the DUI test was conducted. That could be why it said to charge him with negligence, instead of DUI.

Maybe Xkuger can clarify the issue for us.

My question is, doesn't that reflect on his moral character?



Newly

Hi Newly,

I think you are correct. I think the court had an issue with him being charged with a DUI.

Well, I think the DUI could bar him from naturalization, though I do not think permanently.

It all depends on the interviewing officer. I know of a guy here in Northern Virginia who was naturalized about a year ago even though he had two DUI convictions, as well as a dismissed felony charge on this rap sheet. The latter was dismissed because the other party did not show up in court.

Well, I think this guy should have had his GC revoked and kicked back to where he came from.

I know cases personally, at various DOs, where people were naturalized without the mandatory civics/English 'test'. They were called for their interviews and all the officer said "sign here and here and there. Are you interested in taking the oath this afternoon?". Yeah...I would not mind such an interview myself. Yet, as a matter of fairness, there should be consitency throughout.

The bottom line: The entire naturalization process seems to be highly discretionary, with way too much wiggling room for individual officers. One officer denies a certain N-400 application, while an identical application passes with flying colors at a different DO.

Also, remember the then INS audit in the late 1990s? Well, they discovered that 10,000 plus individuals had been naturalized without proper background checks, many of them charged with serious felonies. I cannot recall a single person who was "de-naturalized" as a result. Even though it does happen, as was recently the case with a former Nazi who had been actively involved in various concentration camps and became a U.S. citizen in the 1970s or so, to strip somebody of his/her citizenship is a difficult and lengthly process.

This is particularly true if he/she does not hold any other citizenship and cannot claim any other, so de-naturalization would leave him/her stateless.

With USCIS, you have another example of incredible gov't efficiency, you never know what to expect... .

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not sure if we are talking about the same guy (mexican immigrant, charged for DUI, INS was trying to deport him), but what I have read, that the guy got felony DUI (put a couple of people with serious injuries into Intencive Care Unit), and got his 2 years in prison. After that INS tried to deport him, but verdict from court was: DUI is not CMT (crime of moral turpitude) and the alien is not deportable.

So, my advise: hire a good lawer which could use such verdicts as a references.
Good luck and keep updating your info here!

BTW, guys, do not tell us, that DUI is "blah-blah, you could kill someone, blah-blah". FYI: you could get DUI w/out driving. How? Just simply have BBQ party with beer at your backyard with car keys in you pocket. If you are noisy enough at your backyard and police come to calm you down, they could arrest you for "intend to drive while intoxicated" = DUI record. Voila!
I know the guy who's bad luck was to drive with 2 beers in his stomach (BAC: <0.04). And, guess what? You are right: DUI.
Another story: the guy was walking out from sports bar to bus station with car keys in his pocket. Was stopped by cops for questions and ID check. And now, guess what? Bingo! DUI! (Public intox; Intend to drive while intox).

Also, BTW: speeding 20 miles above speedlimit is also misdeaminor (you definetelly could kill someone on highway) with weekend work sentence three times more than for DUI first offence. So make your judgements by your own and keep in mind that the System could have your ass just like 1-2-3 for nothing.
 
Calisto12 said:
I am not sure if we are talking about the same guy (mexican immigrant, charged for DUI, INS was trying to deport him), but what I have read, that the guy got felony DUI (put a couple of people with serious injuries into Intencive Care Unit), and got his 2 years in prison. After that INS tried to deport him, but verdict from court was: DUI is not CMT (crime of moral turpitude) and the alien is not deportable.

So, my advise: hire a good lawer which could use such verdicts as a references.
Good luck and keep updating your info here!

BTW, guys, do not tell us, that DUI is "blah-blah, you could kill someone, blah-blah". FYI: you could get DUI w/out driving. How? Just simply have BBQ party with beer at your backyard with car keys in you pocket. If you are noisy enough at your backyard and police come to calm you down, they could arrest you for "intend to drive while intoxicated" = DUI record. Voila!
I know the guy who's bad luck was to drive with 2 beers in his stomach (BAC: <0.04). And, guess what? You are right: DUI.
Another story: the guy was walking out from sports bar to bus station with car keys in his pocket. Was stopped by cops for questions and ID check. And now, guess what? Bingo! DUI! (Public intox; Intend to drive while intox).

Also, BTW: speeding 20 miles above speedlimit is also misdeaminor (you definetelly could kill someone on highway) with weekend work sentence three times more than for DUI first offence. So make your judgements by your own and keep in mind that the System could have your ass just like 1-2-3 for nothing.

Calisto12,

Can you tell us which court decided that? I am curious. Crime of Moral Turpitude, as it relates to the INS, is a matter of Federal Law. My point is state courts don't have jurisdiction over such cases.

Thanks,

Newly
 
NewlyMinted said:
Calisto12,

Can you tell us which court decided that? I am curious. Crime of Moral Turpitude, as it relates to the INS, is a matter of Federal Law. My point is state courts don't have jurisdiction over such cases.

Thanks,

Newly

Which court decided what? To deport or to find defendant non-deportable?
 
Calisto12

You said "but verdict from court was: DUI is not CMT (crime of moral turpitude) and the alien is not deportable."

I would like to know which court decided that. Was a state court or federal court?

As I said before, immigration law is federal law. State courts have no jurisdiction over them.


Newly
 
mpatel79 said:
I am a GC holder so H1 revocation isn't an issue. And VA is really tough on DUIs so I could only get the "standard" plea deal. How much longer should I wait?


I recommend that you talk to a lawyer and do not try to apply before you know your options. I think the lawyer will not advice you to apply and it seems that you have at least to wait 5 years after this incident to have it buried in your past.

Do not forget talk to a lawyer. You can also try Ron at:

http://immigration-information.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=17

He is nice enough to give people free advice
 
NewlyMinted said:
Calisto12

You said "but verdict from court was: DUI is not CMT (crime of moral turpitude) and the alien is not deportable."

I would like to know which court decided that. Was a state court or federal court?

As I said before, immigration law is federal law. State courts have no jurisdiction over them.


Newly


Hmm. It was quiet a while ago. Just googled for "felony DUI deporation" and found something similar (Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. ____ (Case No. 03-583) ):
http://www.dui-dwi.com/case-of-the-week05.html

Also (Supreme Court Overrules Deportation of Haitian Immigrant for Felony DUI Conviction):
http://ouilawyer.com/case_of_the_week_archives.html

But all these facts are related to felony DUI (i.e. aggravated felony), which is potentially a deportable offence
 
zzerous said:
..to wait 5 years after this incident to have it buried in your past.

Who says about "5 years"? Why 5 years, not 3 years (3 years is usual probation time for the most misdeaminor DUI cases)?
 
One of the Citizenship requirements is 'Good Moral Character' for 5 years.

Whether DUI is considered bad moral character is up to the DO. Consult with a local attorney who deals with your DO - he/she will know.
 
Calisto12,

Thanks for the info. I wanted to know which court issued the ruling because Xkuger said that the Florida Supreme Court stop a deportation. As far as I know, state courts don't have jurisdiction of immigration matters.

thanks,

Newly
 
Scruit said:
One of the Citizenship requirements is 'Good Moral Character' for 5 years.

Whether DUI is considered bad moral character is up to the DO. Consult with a local attorney who deals with your DO - he/she will know.

Section 101(f) of the Act and 8 CFR 316.10:
Link: http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dl...plates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-8cfrsec31610

"(b) Finding of a lack of good moral character.


(1) An applicant shall be found to lack good moral character, if the applicant has been:



(i) Convicted of murder at any time; or (Revised 9/24/93; 58 FR 49913)



(ii) Convicted of an aggravated felony as defined in Section 101(a)(43) of the Act on or after November 29, 1990. (Revised 9/24/93; 58 FR 49913)



(2) An applicant shall be found to lack good moral character if during the statutory period the applicant:



(i) Committed one or more crimes involving moral turpitude, other than a purely political offense, for which the applicant was convicted, except as specified in Section 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the Act;



(ii) Committed two or more offenses for which the applicant was convicted and the aggregate sentence actually imposed was five years or more, provided that, if the offense was committed outside the United States, it was not a purely political offense;



(iii) Violated any law of the United States, any State, or any foreign country relating to a controlled substance, provided that the violation was not a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana;



(iv) Admits committing any criminal act covered by paragraphs (b)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section for which there was never a formal charge, indictment, arrest, or conviction, whether committed in the United States or any other country;



(v) Is or was confined to a penal institution for an aggregate of 180 days pursuant to a conviction or convictions (provided that such confinement was not outside the United States due to a conviction outside the United States for a purely political offense);



(vi) Has given false testimony to obtain any benefit from the Act, if the testimony was made under oath or affirmation and with an intent to obtain an immigration benefit; this prohibition applies regardless of whether the information provided in the false testimony was material, in the sense that if given truthfully it would have rendered ineligible for benefits either the applicant or the person on whose behalf the applicant sought the benefit;



(vii) Is or was involved in prostitution or commercialized vice as described in Section 212(a)(2)(D) of the Act;



(viii) Is or was involved in the smuggling of a person or persons into the United States as described in Section 212(a)(6)(E) of the Act;



(ix) Has practiced or is practicing polygamy;



(x) Committed two or more gambling offenses for which the applicant was convicted;



(xi) Earns his or her income principally from illegal gambling activities; or



(xii) Is or was a habitual drunkard.



(3) Unless the applicant establishes extenuating circumstances, the applicant shall be found to lack good moral character if, during the statutory period, the applicant:



(i) Willfully failed or refused to support dependents;



(ii) Had an extramarital affair which tended to destroy an existing marriage; or



(iii) Committed unlawful acts that adversely reflect upon the applicant's moral character, or was convicted or imprisoned for such acts, although the acts do not fall within the purview of Sec.316.10(b)(1) or (2).".

Also:
INA: ACT 212 - GENERAL CLASSES OF ALIENS INELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE VISAS AND INELIGIBLE FOR ADMISSION; WAIVERS OF INADMISSIBILLITY

Sec. 212. [8 U.S.C. 1182]
(2) Criminal and related grounds:
http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dl...=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act212a2

Sorry, I might be wrong, but:
- I do not see any information that First offence DUI = lack of GMC (Good Moral Character);
- I do not see any info about "5 years" waiting period for the first(multiple) DUI offence(s).

However:

http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dl...d-14097?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0


"(B) Been a Habitual Drunkard? 8 CFR 316.10(b)(2)(xii) and Interpretations 316.1(e) deal with the issue of good moral character where the applicant is an habitual drunkard. Chapter 73.6 of this manual also contains more information on this aspect of eligibility.

First, be sure to ask the question, and any follow-up questions needed to ensure that you have the applicant’s full response. Examine any divorce decrees, as well as other documents submitted for information that would lead you to believe that the applicant was a habitual drunkard. Some divorce decrees will state that the cause of the divorce was the applicant’s alcoholism. You might also consider any termination from employment or unexplained periods of unemployment as a possible indication that the applicant was unable to work because he or she was an habitual drunkard. The rap sheet may show arrests or convictions for public intoxication, or the motor vehicle bureau may report arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol/intoxication. Depending on the State in which the applicant resides, you may have to request this directly from the motor vehicle bureau.
".

So, for sure, it is up good lawer to prove, that your DUI is just a single episode, which does not show the lack of GMC.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top