I-129F Question about Criminal History

[pushbrk 13,582]

"A negotiation between the defense and prosecution (and sometimes the judge) that settles a criminal case. The defendant typically pleads guilty to a lesser crime (or fewer charges) than originally charged, in exchange for a guaranteed sentence that is shorter than what the defendant could face if convicted at trial. The prosecution gets the certainty of a conviction and a known sentence; the defendant avoids the risk of a higher sentence; and the judge gets to move on to other cases."

http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/32...194F0B/alpha/P/

Exactly. In our IMBRA context, the questions are about the names of the crimes. So, the keyword is "crime" not "sentence". For example, regardless of the sentence, a conviction for "negligent driving" instead of "DWI" doesn't count for IMBRA. The name of the crime, not the sentence imposed, is what makes the difference between yes and no on the I-129F and that's the context of our discussion. One may negotiate with the purpose of reducing the potential sentence but their reasons for negotiation have nothing to do with whether they end up later needed to answer yes or no to a question on a fiancee petition and neither does the initial sentence.

Where the length or severity of the sentence comes into play is for the intending immigrant on a visa application.

[kylejb 0]

I did not plead nolo. I would have stated that. I can only say what it was. I am sorry if I am confusing everyone or making it difficult. I am not trying to. I am just stating that I was on probabtion. Then I was off. I did a records check when I was on probabtion and it showed. I did one when I was off and it is stamped no convictions. The same as it is now. I have paid for internet searches, (which are probably worthless) and nothing shows.

I have paid $455.00 dollars for the k1. I paid for an attorney. I have visited my fiancee several times and paid for visas and plane fair. She knows. I would not go thru all of this expense, time, effort, to try and HIDE something now. I just simply did not even think about it when I filled in the question. I am only going by what the papers state. There is nothing to hide from anyone. My fiancess knows.

I will just have to pray and hope that if it does come up, they will give me the opportunity to show why I checked the box. I just don't want them to think I was trying to pull a fast one or something. That is why I was asking if there is a way I can contact them, send them a certified letter, or anything I can do to make sure it doesn't get rejected or me banned from submitting it or whatever. If I get a RFE, then great. I can send everything I have, and write a letter along with it or whatever it takes. I can even call them on the phone. I just want an opportunity to explain that is all.

Everyone can think what they want. I can even scan the paper here and show you. I would not go thru all the things I have to LIE about something now. That would be stupid.

I just hope my mistake doesn't cost me my life. And basically that is how I look at it. Because without her, then there is nothing.

"A negotiation between the defense and prosecution (and sometimes the judge) that settles a criminal case. The defendant typically pleads guilty to a lesser crime (or fewer charges) than originally charged, in exchange for a guaranteed sentence that is shorter than what the defendant could face if convicted at trial. The prosecution gets the certainty of a conviction and a known sentence; the defendant avoids the risk of a higher sentence; and the judge gets to move on to other cases."

http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/32...194F0B/alpha/P/

[pushbrk 13,582]

I did not plead nolo. I would have stated that. I can only say what it was. I am sorry if I am confusing everyone or making it difficult. I am not trying to. I am just stating that I was on probabtion. Then I was off. I did a records check when I was on probabtion and it showed. I did one when I was off and it is stamped no convictions. The same as it is now. I have paid for internet searches, (which are probably worthless) and nothing shows.

I have paid $455.00 dollars for the k1. I paid for an attorney. I have visited my fiancee several times and paid for visas and plane fair. She knows. I would not go thru all of this expense, time, effort, to try and HIDE something now. I just simply did not even think about it when I filled in the question. I am only going by what the papers state. There is nothing to hide from anyone. My fiancess knows.

I will just have to pray and hope that if it does come up, they will give me the opportunity to show why I checked the box. I just don't want them to think I was trying to pull a fast one or something. That is why I was asking if there is a way I can contact them, send them a certified letter, or anything I can do to make sure it doesn't get rejected or me banned from submitting it or whatever. If I get a RFE, then great. I can send everything I have, and write a letter along with it or whatever it takes. I can even call them on the phone. I just want an opportunity to explain that is all.

Everyone can think what they want. I can even scan the paper here and show you. I would not go thru all the things I have to LIE about something now. That would be stupid.

I just hope my mistake doesn't cost me my life. And basically that is how I look at it. Because without her, then there is nothing.

"A negotiation between the defense and prosecution (and sometimes the judge) that settles a criminal case. The defendant typically pleads guilty to a lesser crime (or fewer charges) than originally charged, in exchange for a guaranteed sentence that is shorter than what the defendant could face if convicted at trial. The prosecution gets the certainty of a conviction and a known sentence; the defendant avoids the risk of a higher sentence; and the judge gets to move on to other cases."

http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/32...194F0B/alpha/P/

I think the worst case is that you'll be required to provide court records if you've answered incorrectly. I'm surprised your attorney was unaware that all "convictions" are available to immigration related record checks, even when not publicly available or not available to your local police department. In any event, you'll just have to wait and see. In the future, (for immigration purposes) when asked if you were convicted, the answer is yes but only if asked about convictions for the specific crime.

[JimVaPhuong 4,864]

Kyle, I don't think anybody here is accusing you of lying. You acted in good faith, from what you've said. It sounds like you only misunderstood what was required by USCIS, and were perhaps unaware that records of your conviction probably DO exist, and that USCIS can access those records. A public records search wouldn't reveal what the FBI knows about your conviction, for example. You'd have to file a petition under the FOI act to get those records. USCIS, on the other hand, is under the Department of Homeland Security - they CAN get to those records.

A point that's been brought up several times, and which I think you've missed, is that the question on the I-129F is about SPECIFIC crimes under the IMBRA. For example, domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, homicide, murder, rape, multiple alcohol or drug related offenses, etc. These are the sort of thing that a prospective spouse should be informed about, and is the intent of the IMBRA laws. If your conviction was not for one of the specific crimes covered by the IMBRA, then it won't matter - it doesn't need to be disclosed.

So, before anyone can tell you what you should do, we need to know if the conviction is covered by the IMBRA.

[rebeccajo 14]

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=147298

[kylejb 0]

I went thru a very bad divorce over 16 years ago. My X accused me of child abuse. I got FULL CUSTODY Of my children. I have papers I can prove that. They lived with me from the ages of 3 and 5 until last year, which they are now 21 and 19.

I was stupid enough to believe a poor attorney rather than fighting the accusation to take his advice and do probation. Once it was done, there would be nothing on my record and I would have NO CONVICTIONS. So, that is what I did. I didn't want to lose my children, that I had just gotten custody of. Yes, even in light of the accusations, I got full custody. How often does a man get custody of his children when being accused? So I didn't want to push it and lose them. I know, it was stupid to do it, but what is done is done.

So when I saw the paper that said I was not convicted, I believe that I wasn't. Then the state wanted to put me on a sex offender list, for something that I didn't do. They did for a while until I got a civil rights attorney and fought it and I am not on there. They illegally added me. So it took a while to be removed because I was never convicted. Again, being unjustly put on something when I didn't do anything. So, I am not on any list. Either state wide or nation wide. And I have the paper stating I was not convicted. So, that is my story.

I hope I didn't make a mistake by not discolsing it. I am just going by what I thought was the truth. Obviously I was a fool for believing it. Now it may cost me the best thing (next to my 2 children) that has ever happened to me. If they give me the opportunity to explain, that is all I want. I don't want them to think I was trying to hide something. That is all. Because I HONESTLY was not. It was 16 years ago, and I have told my finacee about it. So there is not a problem there. I just don't want to have screwed up on the paper. I wll never forgive myself if I did. I just didn't think about it and now I am regreting having not looked at it closer. Again, I am just reading the paper that I was not convicted, but I understand how they will think that I was or whatever.

So, I guess I will just have to wait. I just hope they don't refuse it and it cost me my life.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=147298

[daboyz 36]

Are you married now? Your profile doesn't say which visa you are applying for. If your married, file I-130 and go for CR-1/IR-1 and then IMBRA is not even an issue.

[kylejb 0]

No, we are not married. It is the K1.

Tell me more about the I-130 and the CR-1/IR-1

Are you married now? Your profile doesn't say which visa you are applying for. If your married, file I-130 and go for CR-1/IR-1 and then IMBRA is not even an issue.

[mahboula 11]

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

[daboyz 36]

No, we are not married. It is the K1.

Tell me more about the I-130 and the CR-1/IR-1

Are you married now? Your profile doesn't say which visa you are applying for. If your married, file I-130 and go for CR-1/IR-1 and then IMBRA is not even an issue.

If you're married, you have two options. K-3 or CR-1/IR-1. IMBRA only applies to K visas due to the filing of the I-129F. If you just flat out file the I-130, the issue never comes up.

[JimVaPhuong 4,864]

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

Nope. This is exactly the scenario that came up last week. USCIS does consider deferred adjudication to be a conviction. It makes no difference what the state's definition of "conviction" is when it comes to immigration. It matters only how USCIS defines it.

[daboyz 36]

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

Nope. This is exactly the scenario that came up last week. USCIS does consider deferred adjudication to be a conviction. It makes no difference what the state's definition of "conviction" is when it comes to immigration. It matters only how USCIS defines it.

[kylejb 0]

That is how I looked at it. My case was dismissed, and I have no convictions. So that is why I thought I could answer the question the way I did. Not to hide anything.

So if they consider it a conviction, then I can only hope and pray that they will allow me to explain why I answered the way I did.

I was not trying to do anything. Just trying to be honest.

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

Nope. This is exactly the scenario that came up last week. USCIS does consider deferred adjudication to be a conviction. It makes no difference what the state's definition of "conviction" is when it comes to immigration. It matters only how USCIS defines it.

[mahboula 11]

That is how I looked at it. My case was dismissed, and I have no convictions. So that is why I thought I could answer the question the way I did. Not to hide anything.

So if they consider it a conviction, then I can only hope and pray that they will allow me to explain why I answered the way I did.

I was not trying to do anything. Just trying to be honest.

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

Nope. This is exactly the scenario that came up last week. USCIS does consider deferred adjudication to be a conviction. It makes no difference what the state's definition of "conviction" is when it comes to immigration. It matters only how USCIS defines it.

I understand why you answered the way you did. It's too bad USCIS sees things differently. Anyway, good luck to you. I hope things work out for the best.

[JimVaPhuong 4,864]

That is how I looked at it. My case was dismissed, and I have no convictions. So that is why I thought I could answer the question the way I did. Not to hide anything.

So if they consider it a conviction, then I can only hope and pray that they will allow me to explain why I answered the way I did.

I was not trying to do anything. Just trying to be honest.

In response to some of the posts that state you can't be on probation unless you were convicted...This in incorrect. There are cases where the state will withhold adjudication and place you on probation (or another agreed upon arrangement). At the end of probation, if there are no issues, the case will be either dismissed or you are found not guilty, depending on the agreement. In cases such as these, as long as there is successful completion of probation, the accused does not have a conviction on his record, and is legally allowed to answer "no" when asked if they have any convictions. Perhaps the OP falls into this category.

Nope. This is exactly the scenario that came up last week. USCIS does consider deferred adjudication to be a conviction. It makes no difference what the state's definition of "conviction" is when it comes to immigration. It matters only how USCIS defines it.

Ok, I don't even know if this is a real possibility, so I'm just throwing it out there...

How long has it been since you filed? Any chance you could cancel the petition before an adjudicator starts working on it? If so, you might be able to re-file with the correct disclosures. Yes, you'll lose the $455, but at least you won't have a finding of material misrepresentation on your record at USCIS.