What are the restrictions on the petitioner.......

[Rapur Milele 0]

Hello my friends here.

I do hope I am not judged too harshly as I am new here and need some help.

I married my fiancee in her country and have filed a CR-1 visa for her. Wet met online in June of 2010 and talked continuously ever since, too bad the calling cards I was using did not keep records, but in June of this year I found Rebtel and have been using it ever since, they offer online records. The I-130 was accepted and I got the NOA1 dated 9/23/2011 last week.

I am a convicted felon with 3 drug offenses. She knows of my crimanl background and does not hold it against me. Her family loves me dearly and wants to see us together. I submitted the I-130 and G-325a forms along with my marriage license, photos from the wedding party of her and I together, with her family, photos of me and her father, stepmother, brothers and sisters, receipts for the engagement ring and wedding bands, crystal champagne glasses, knife and cake server that were personalized with our names and date of the marriage, affidavits from 2 of her family members attesting to their personal knowledge of our relationship that are notarized, copies of my boarding passes and visa entry and exit stamps in my passport, apartment rental receipts from the honeymoon suite on the beach, copies of my enrollment to add her on to my medical and life insurance policies, copies of 2 credit cards in her name added on to my account, copies of western union receipts where I send her money to help her, telephone records of our calls, (I bought her a Magic Jack now and it does work, but it does not keep records that I know of). With all this said I ask of anyone here for some advice: how bad will my background prohibit my petition from being granted? My convictions are more than 15 years old and I am studying all I can about this. There are no IMBRA waivers needed... as the restrictions there do not apply to CR-1 petitions, only the Adam Walsh Act correct? What are the restrictions to the petitioner as I have read conflicting requirements from lawyers themselves. Some say there are no IMBRA waivers or implications ands others quote the restrictions from IMBRA, I am somewhat confused...I am planning to return early in 2012 for another visit and will supplement my petition with this additional evidence to demonstrate an ongoing relationship, I love her very much and desire her here with me.

Any advice here is greatly appreciated. Good tidings and blessings to you all.

[Ryan H 3,795]

Adam Walsh Act deals with sex crimes. Since your convictions (as you state) are for drug offenses, the Adam Walsh Act is not germane to your situation.

[Tim/Mav 305]

Just my thoughts and not being a judge about anything, but gives the OP things to consider.

You have bigger issues here than proving a ongoing relationship.

You have been Convicted 3 times and a Felon. I'm not sure why you brought up the Adam Walsh Act unless one of those Convictions applies to you.

3 or more drug charges with conviction means your screwed and can ask for a Waivor showing treatment, good moral charactor and rehabilitated.

Proof of a relationship after your NOA1 a week ago is meaningless and only means they cashed your check.

You should have supplied with your Petition Court Records, Treatment in Certified/Stamped Originals. For each of the Charges and Convictions.

You are in over your head with your Petition and suggest help from an Attorney with your Waivor.

Key word: If it applies. 3 or more Convictions for Drugs.

Key word: Adam Walsh applies to Spousal Abuse/Children related Convictions.

If you did not supply this information above: Your NOA2 will NEVER HAPPEN.....A RFE or Flat Denial could be the result.

This is not Gold Advice and not to be meant as Advice.

Good luck.

[Penguin_ie 5,986]

If the convictions are for drugs only (ie NOT Adam Walsh), and as your wife knows, there is no problem, you seem to have a lot of evidence. You may want to try and visit once more during the process and/ or being there at the interview if you can.

PS: large font and no paragraphs makes your post difficult to read!

[Tim/Mav 305]

If the convictions are for drugs only (ie NOT Adam Walsh), and as your wife knows, there is no problem, you seem to have a lot of evidence. You may want to try and visit once more during the process and/ or being there at the interview if you can.

PS: large font and no paragraphs makes your post difficult to read!

Just me. I terribly disagree. IMBRA states 3 Convictions or more for Drug Convictions. Your wife knowing would not make a difference. As I stated above: Proof of treatment and documented.

Evidence of going to Marry Someone in another Country is not a Right to Enter the US because you have a MAGIC JACK and keep in Touch.

We are talking a CONVICTED FELON here. Even One Drug charge/conviction is bad but 3? Whats more to this story.

The Petitioner should have considered these past Convictions before Marrying.

Evidence of being Married and Proof of an Ongoing relationship with a NOA1 in your pocket.

You will fall short when they investigate your case unless you provide what the need. Even then, I wish you luck.

Penguin, I like you but how could you say 3 Convictions for Drugs will not Matter?

[Penguin_ie 5,986]

It is my understanding IMBRA only applies to fiance petitions, not to spousal visas. OP is going for a spousal visa. I freely admit I am not an expert in IMBRA though!

Edited October 5, 2011 by Penguin_ie

[Tim/Mav 305]

It is my understanding IMBRA only applies to fiance petitions, not to spousal visas. OP is going for a spousal visa. I freely admit I am not an expert in IMBRA though!

I admit I'm Not an Expert on Anything. But, there has to be alittle Common Sense here is my thought.

[The Humanists 10]

With all this said I ask of anyone here for some advice: how bad will my background prohibit my petition from being granted? My convictions are more than 15 years old and I am studying all I can about this. There are no IMBRA waivers needed... as the restrictions there do not apply to CR-1 petitions, only the Adam Walsh Act correct?

I'm not an expert either, but I think I can answer your questions based on our own experience with USCIS. My husband had 4 criminal convictions in his past, and they were much more recent than yours: 3 DUIs and 1 drug possession. Since there was no question in the I-130 about the petitioner's criminal background, we didn't submit any waiver, police records, certificate of good moral character, proof of rehabilitation, or anything of the sort. Our petition got approved after 167 days. We received no RFEs. So I guess the IMBRA does not apply to CR1/IR1 petitions. If it did, we wouldn't have gotten through USCIS. As long as your convictions don't fall under the AWA, and there are no other issues, your petition will probably be approved. We are now at the NVC stage where NVC is just waiting for us to submit the AOS and DS-230 packages. I still don't know if I'll have any issues at the interview. But from what I understand, the consulate will care more about the beneficiary's criminal background, and I have none. I reckon they'll just ask me if I'm aware of my husband's past. Also, I remember reading a post here from 2010, written by a beneficiary whose fiancé had multiple drug convictions and DUIs, too, and she was approved at the interview. She said she was just asked if she aware of his past. She said yes, and that was it.

Hope I was able to help. I remember that after my husband and I sent our petition, we had the same questions and no definite answers. Don't expect NOA2 to come soon, though. Our approval took longer than those of other petitioners who filed on the same month. Theirs took around 2-3 months; ours took a little over 5 months.

Good luck!

[Rapur Milele 0]

Thank you for your replies, and to The Humanist I am truly appreciative for your input. I thought that Tim/Mav was somewhat in error in his reading and understanding of IMBRA as it does not have any implications on the CR-1 Visa Petitions.

I am planning a return trip to her country at the turn of the year and will submit this as evidence also with more photos and happy times with the family. I do want as many friends as possible and need help as I walk through this. As I see I am not alone here and thank all for their input.

I will take Penguin's advice and alter my writing style and utilize all input from the community here.

Thanks a million you guys and anything you may think of that can help me or you feel I may need to know, please do not hesitate to drop it on me.......

Thanks

[Done--Really 331]

Hey Pie....

Go for it. Be happy. You really shouldn't have any issues relating to your past

[Rapur Milele 0]

Gee whiz, thanks a lot guys.

After researching more I cam across an article from an immigration attorney that states the Adam Walsh as such, this should remove doubt and clarify the differences between the IMBRA and AWA Acts.......

Adam Walsh Act and Family Immigration

By Christopher Stoll

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act is intended to protect children under the age of 18 from crimes committed by sexual predators who are United States citizens or permanent residents. The act is distinguished from the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA) as it can bar petitioners convicted of "any specified offense against a minor" from obtaining a family based visa for any person, whether a minor or an adult. IMBRA pivots primarily on K- Fiancee Visa Petitions and K-3 Spousal Visa Petitions while the Adam Walsh Act turns on any of the family based immigration petitions, including the CR-1 and IR-1 petitions. A "specified offense" against a minor in the Adam Walsh Act is enumerated as:

Kidnapping or false imprisonment except by a parent or guardian

Solicitation of Sexual Conduct

Use in a sexual performance

Video voyeurism

Possession, production or distribution of child pornography

Criminal sexual misconduct involving a minor, or using the internet to facilitate or attempt such conduct

As state, federal and international laws might identify the above offenses differently, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service examines the elements of each "specific offense" to determine if they are substantially similar to the above offenses. When an investigation of a petitioner shows that he has been convicted of a "specified offense" he will be required to supply certified copies of all appropriate law enforcement and court records while also being fingerprinted. Should fingerprints and submitted materials reveal that the petitioner was not convicted of a "specified offense", a decision must be made on whether the petitioner poses a risk to the beneficiary. It is the petitioner's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not pose a risk. Should the decision be that the petitioner does pose a risk, the petition is required to be denied with the reason(s) for denial being set forth in writing. Should the decision be that the petitioner poses no risk of harm,. that decision is required to be affirmed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service.

In theory, due process procedures exist for a person accused or convicted of a "specified offense" to exhaust available administrative or judicial remedies, however, with the burden of proof being on the petitioner coupled with the anxiety and expense of protracted litigation, it appears as if there are no reported cases that have navigated their way far enough to provide guidance on USCIS affirmation. It is prudent to retain the services of any experienced immigration attorney for purposes of any K or F Visa Petition

Christopher J. Stoll is an attorney who has assisted the immigrant community for over 25 years. He is licensed to practice in the immigration courts of all 50 states.

http://www.amimm.net

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Christopher_Stoll

I hope this can clarify and help someone else similiary situated. IMBRA applies to "K" based visas and "AWA" is broad sweeping and covers IR/CR Visas for enumerated offenses.

[sweetapple 1]

Gee whiz, thanks a lot guys.

After researching more I cam across an article from an immigration attorney that states the Adam Walsh as such, this should remove doubt and clarify the differences between the IMBRA and AWA Acts.......

Adam Walsh Act and Family Immigration

By Christopher Stoll

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act is intended to protect children under the age of 18 from crimes committed by sexual predators who are United States citizens or permanent residents. The act is distinguished from the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA) as it can bar petitioners convicted of "any specified offense against a minor" from obtaining a family based visa for any person, whether a minor or an adult. IMBRA pivots primarily on K- Fiancee Visa Petitions and K-3 Spousal Visa Petitions while the Adam Walsh Act turns on any of the family based immigration petitions, including the CR-1 and IR-1 petitions. A "specified offense" against a minor in the Adam Walsh Act is enumerated as:

Kidnapping or false imprisonment except by a parent or guardian

Solicitation of Sexual Conduct

Use in a sexual performance

Video voyeurism

Possession, production or distribution of child pornography

Criminal sexual misconduct involving a minor, or using the internet to facilitate or attempt such conduct

As state, federal and international laws might identify the above offenses differently, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service examines the elements of each "specific offense" to determine if they are substantially similar to the above offenses. When an investigation of a petitioner shows that he has been convicted of a "specified offense" he will be required to supply certified copies of all appropriate law enforcement and court records while also being fingerprinted. Should fingerprints and submitted materials reveal that the petitioner was not convicted of a "specified offense", a decision must be made on whether the petitioner poses a risk to the beneficiary. It is the petitioner's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not pose a risk. Should the decision be that the petitioner does pose a risk, the petition is required to be denied with the reason(s) for denial being set forth in writing. Should the decision be that the petitioner poses no risk of harm,. that decision is required to be affirmed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service.

In theory, due process procedures exist for a person accused or convicted of a "specified offense" to exhaust available administrative or judicial remedies, however, with the burden of proof being on the petitioner coupled with the anxiety and expense of protracted litigation, it appears as if there are no reported cases that have navigated their way far enough to provide guidance on USCIS affirmation. It is prudent to retain the services of any experienced immigration attorney for purposes of any K or F Visa Petition

Christopher J. Stoll is an attorney who has assisted the immigrant community for over 25 years. He is licensed to practice in the immigration courts of all 50 states.

http://www.amimm.net

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Christopher_Stoll

I hope this can clarify and help someone else similiary situated. IMBRA applies to "K" based visas and "AWA" is broad sweeping and covers IR/CR Visas for enumerated offenses.

Does AWA apply for Domestic Violence conviction?

[Rapur Milele 0]

Does AWA apply for Domestic Violence conviction?

Not that I can gather from the language of the Adam Walsh Act. It focuses directly on abuse of any kind directed toward minors from what I can understand.

Is your situation similiar to mine or you have only Domestic Violence convictions? Feel free to contact me as I am researching these topics regularly and will share what I have learned. CR-1 filers are not exempt from this Act, but as I research it appears to be the only one that has any affect on IR/CR filers. IMBRA has no implications on IR/CR filers.

My best to you and again drop me an email here and I will get back with you if you desire.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Does AWA apply for Domestic Violence conviction?

No it does not.

IMBRA doesn't apply to CR/IR Visa Applications but background checks are done on the petitioner and if there is any doubt in the CO's mind they are more than free to ask your wife about your past convictions. If they do and she doesn't know abotu them then it can be added to the list of reasons they don't believe the relationship is real.

AWA does apply to ALL Visa Applications but it is limited in scope to those convicted of Child Sex Offenses.

[pushbrk 12,174]

Just my thoughts and not being a judge about anything, but gives the OP things to consider.

You have bigger issues here than proving a ongoing relationship.

You have been Convicted 3 times and a Felon. I'm not sure why you brought up the Adam Walsh Act unless one of those Convictions applies to you.

3 or more drug charges with conviction means your screwed and can ask for a Waivor showing treatment, good moral charactor and rehabilitated.

Proof of a relationship after your NOA1 a week ago is meaningless and only means they cashed your check.

You should have supplied with your Petition Court Records, Treatment in Certified/Stamped Originals. For each of the Charges and Convictions.

You are in over your head with your Petition and suggest help from an Attorney with your Waivor.

Key word: If it applies. 3 or more Convictions for Drugs.

Key word: Adam Walsh applies to Spousal Abuse/Children related Convictions.

If you did not supply this information above: Your NOA2 will NEVER HAPPEN.....A RFE or Flat Denial could be the result.

This is not Gold Advice and not to be meant as Advice.

Good luck.

The above is simply not correct. IMBRA does not apply to I-130 petitions or CR1 visa cases. Drug convictions are not part of the Adam Walsh act.

The OP would be wise to completely disregard the above post. It is chock full of misinformation.

To the point, unless the US Citizen petitioner has an Adam Walsh Act related conviction, they could be currently on parole for armed robbery and still get a petition approved and visa issued to for their spouse. For foreigners, it's an entirely different ball game.