Speeding tickets

[WBH]

In any such case, the answer should always be a resounding NO, there is simply no way an IO can find out if you said any such thing in an informal occasion and it simply makes no sense for an IO to ask such a question (assuming the story is true, which I doubt).

Another thing is , though not applicable to most, soem future job may require a polygraph test
that involve certain questions about immigration history. If you once said "I am a citizen" to your
neighbor simply because he always inquire about your visa status and you did not disclose that on N400, later you may find you are in a dilemma when admisnistered that polygraph test

 

[jayoa]

The issue is if someone already answered YES, how can he/she remedy the situation if the IO
does not see the difference and insist a citizen claim is a claim no matter how it is claimed?

A similar situation can arise if an applicant answers YES to the question "Have you ever commited a crime for which you were not arrested?" and explained that
when he worked at Microsoft 10 years ago, he took a pen home for personal use and now he repent that is a theft.

I understand. But while it is good to repent and be remorseful, I really don't know what to tell whoever answered YES to any of those questions other than to find a priest or pray privately to God for forgiveness if they feel the need to repent, and not to seek repentance from an IO. Hopefully such a response does not turn out regretful post-interview. However, I wanted to put it out there for those also thinking about this that NO is more appropriate except if you formally claimed to be a citizen on a government document/application or something.

 

[jayoa]

Another thing is , though not applicable to most, soem future job may require a polygraph test
that involve certain questions about immigration history. If you once said "I am a citizen" to your
neighbor simply because he always inquire about your visa status and you did not disclose that on N400, later you may find you are in a dilemma when admisnistered that polygraph test

Although I know polygraphs are required on some clearance jobs but they are seldom acceptable in any case which is why courts discount anything that has to do with them. They are full of false positives simply because your body may react in any way to anything you may be thinling of and the machine marks it as a reaction due to the question and answer at hand. On a polygraph test, I will sure be thinking of heavenly things, roses, sheep, cupid, fluffy clouds, cute puppies, and all that good stuff that keeps one calm and collected while I am lying to the questionnaire and make it through most of the questions (search online for how to beat a polygraph). The problem still comes down to the fact that the person disclosed a casual discussion on the N400, well I guess on the polygraph test he had better answer YES as well because a clearance investigation may go as far as having that N400 answer you gave in hand and if you answer differently on polygraph even though the machine does not read your reaction then there may be a discrepancy problem.

 

[WBH]

except if you formally claimed to be a citizen on a government document/application or something.

What if you made a US citizen claim in foreign government documents which USCIS has no access
to? Say if a foriegn country in order to atract foreign tourists or foreign investment, make
some preferrence status for foreign citizens, then a citizen of that country claim he is a US citizen
which he is not. Then later he applies for US citizenship

 

[jayoa]

What if you made a US citizen claim in foreign government documents which USCIS has no access
to? Say if a foriegn country in order to atract foreign tourists or foreign investment, make
some preferrence status for foreign citizens, then a citizen of that country claim he is a US citizen
which he is not. Then later he applies for US citizenship

The key point is swhat you already mentioned "the USCIS does not have access to the information". So I'd say you are good to go but I sincerely think it makes no sense to randomly claim citizenship at any chance one gets. Just avoid any such behaviors until you are actually one. Its not like you will get paid anything for lying.

 

[speakamericano]

Incorrect. This is what it says in the N-400 instructions: "Note that unless a traffic incident was alcoholor drug related, you do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines and incidents that didnot involve an actual arrest if the only penalty was afine of less than $500 and/or points on your driver's license". If the outcome was points on your driver license and/or a fine of less than $500, then there is NO NEED to submit documentation.

Moreover, there is an extensive document on the USCIS website that clearly states that minor traffic violations that did not result in an arrest do not need to be disclosed. Take a look at the top section of page 60: http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About Us... Guide/Permanent_Residents_Naturalization.pdf

i saw what you referred to ... take a look yourself.
page 60 the most imp thing is to be completely honest... point 3
You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
read the note that put quoted above. fine of less than 500... AND / OR ... let's put it this way
fine of less than 500 and points on ur record
fine of less than 500 or points on your record...

he should still take the dmv printout

 

[Vorpal]

i saw what you referred to ... take a look yourself.
page 60 the most imp thing is to be completely honest... point 3
You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
read the note that put quoted above. fine of less than 500... AND / OR ... let's put it this way
fine of less than 500 and points on ur record
fine of less than 500 or points on your record...

he should still take the dmv printout

Here's a quote directly from the document:

"Except for minor traffic offenses that did not result in your arrest (and drunk driving is not considered a minor traffic offense), you should always reveal any arrest, whether or not charged, and any conviction, and whether or not the conviction has been expunged, sealed or vacated."

Minor traffic violations that did not result in an arrest DO NOT need to be disclosed. All other convictions and arrests DO need to be disclosed. It really cannot get more clear than that.

 

[speakamericano]

Here's a quote directly from the document:

"Except for minor traffic offenses that did not result in your arrest (and drunk driving is not considered a minor traffic offense), you should always reveal any arrest, whether or not charged, and any conviction, and whether or not the conviction has been expunged, sealed or vacated."

Minor traffic violations that did not result in an arrest DO NOT need to be disclosed. All other convictions and arrests DO need to be disclosed. It really cannot get more clear than that.

whether or not charged, and any conviction...
prevention is better than cure. what if the IO just happens to ask him for the tickets and wants to see the proof...

 

[Vorpal]

whether or not charged, and any conviction...
prevention is better than cure. what if the IO just happens to ask him for the tickets and wants to see the proof...

Please don't take it as an offense, but are you sure you understand the passage that I quoted? Whether or not charged, and any conviction....EXCEPT FOR MINOR TRAFFIC OFFENSES THAT DID NOT RESULT IN YOUR ARREST!!!

What if the IO happens to ask if you have ever gotten pulled over at a DUI checkpoint (this constitutes being detained by a law enforcement officer, as you are not free to leave until you complete a breathalyzer test) and wants to see proof of outcome? Let's not make mountains out of molehills.