Denied visa possesion of marijuana

[jocaidani 0]

Hello,

 

I have a question but it is not for me, more for my cousin. She got married overseas and applied for a spouse visa for him to come to the us. Everything went well..had his medical..had his interview... the interviewer congratulated him on the visa and everyone knew about the criminal record he had.  The officer even told him it is good that you did not try to cover it up and at the end of the interview he told him, all they need is a clearance letter from the judge sent to the embassy. Once it is received they will send his passport with a visa via dhl to a town nearby his home.  Today unfortunately he got a denial letter stating that he is ineligible for a visa due to marijuana conviction. I know  how bad that already sounds but this happened couple of years back but the case was taking so long that he had to serve 6 months in jail last year.... what can they do in this case? do any of you know good immigration lawyers? have any of you encountered or know someone in a similar situation? I understand the embassy has the right to revoke it, but he did not cover up anything. they knew everything at the time of interview....i would appreciate any help! she just gave birth not too long ago and was hoping he will be here soon to see his newborn.... but everything kind of went downhill today.  

[geowrian 22,335]

What was the exact charge? Was he given a refusal slip stating he is eligible for a waiver? How much marijuana did he have on him (more than 30g?).

The US takes controlled substance activity very seriously for immigration purposes. It might be that he is inadmissible without the opportunity for a waiver.

[jocaidani 0]

Attached is the letter he received 😕 it is very unforunente and she does understand but wld lawyers be able to help w this? 

[Illiria 980]

12 minutes ago, jocaidani said:

Attached is the letter he received 😕 it is very unforunente and she does understand but wld lawyers be able to help w this? 

So

212(a)(2)(A)(I)(II)

 

is crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime

 

212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I)

 

is violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), is inadmissible.

 

212(a)(2)(C)

 

is Controlled SUBSTANCE TRAFFICKERS- Any alien who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows or has reason to believe-- 

(i) is or has been an illicit trafficker in any controlled substance or in any listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), or is or has been a knowing aider, abettor, assister, conspirator, or colluder with others in the illicit trafficking in any such controlled or listed substance or chemical, or endeavored to do so; or

 

so it looks like he was dealing not just in possession? 

[jocaidani 0]

I havent really looked into each section dats y i attached the letter wondering if even lawyers can assist in this case? 

[geowrian 22,335]

33 minutes ago, jocaidani said:

Attached is the letter he received 😕 it is very unforunente and she does understand but wld lawyers be able to help w this? \

INA 212(a)(2)(C) is about drug traffickers. No waiver available for that. That alone is not something that can be fixed.

 

Somebody beat me to the others.

The CIMT is waivable, as well as the other one. But with a drug trafficking inadmissibility, it doesn't really matter.

Edited October 20, 2018 by geowrian

[jocaidani 0]

Yea even the letter as you can see does not have a waiver option checked off.  so if someone does not have the opprutinity for a waiver... lawyers cant even help? I know thats gnna cost her but at this point she does not care.. she just gave birth ... same day of the denial letter  

[geowrian 22,335]

Just now, jocaidani said:

Yea even the letter as you can see does not have a waiver option checked off.  so if someone does not have the opprutinity for a waiver... lawyers cant even help? I know thats gnna cost her but at this point she does not care.. she just gave birth ... same day of the denial letter  

Correct...nothing an attorney can do really. I would still advise a consultation with one to see if there is some way to have the trafficking piece brought down, but I doubt it.

[Boiler 43,381]

Assuming he has a conviction for drug trafficking then she should be the one moving.

[kid1412 62]

Please contact Dyan. I consulted with her before. She specializes in inadmissibility charges and motion to reconsider. In my opinion, she is one of the best immigration attorneys in the country. She fights inadmissibility charges by filing motions to reconsider to appeal to the Consulate visa section chiefs, and there have been cases where she was successful and the Section Chief reversed the decision of the Visa Officer. Of course there is no guarantee and your case might be insurmountable to overcome but give it a try, you got nothing to lose.

 

Disclaimer: I am in no way connected to or benefitted from Mrs. Williams’ law firm. I consulted her in the past and had email correspondences with her and was super impressed with her professionalism and her depth of knowledge of immigration laws. That’s why I always recommend her.

 

https://dyanwilliamslaw.com/solutions-options-success-stories-mobile/

 

P.S: You have to be super honest and tell her everything. I think she’ll only take cases that she thinks will have a chance of success. So if she doesn’t want to take your case, it’s probably doomed, sorry.

Edited October 20, 2018 by kid1412

[kid1412 62]

Also, how about that clearane letter from the court? Has he gotten that? What does that say? Maybe also worth it to consult with a criminal attorney wherever he is to see if there is anything that can be done about that drug charge. Without knowing more about that drug charge, it’s hard to say anything. 

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

As the others have said, trafficking is something that remains unforgiven by US immigration. You can try a lawyer but with no waiver available not sure what a lawyer can do.  The “couple of years back” is nothing....we’ve seen reports here of cases denied from 2-decade-old convictions. 

1 hour ago, Boiler said:

Assuming he has a conviction for drug trafficking then she should be the one moving.

This.

[Going through 5,668]

There's nothing a lawyer can do to change immigration laws---or make him suddenly admissible where there is no waiver available for his charges.

 

If he's already been convicted of the trafficking charge (and seems like he has) in certain circumstances (ie. less than 30g possession)  he may be able to get what's called Post-Conviction Relief---- for example requesting the charges be vacated, or claiming an ineffective lawyer at the time of his trial.  If Post-Conviction Relief is actually granted, then he may be able to challenge the CO's decision.  It's a long-shot at best, though, to be honest.

 

 

[Boiler 43,381]

I certainly assumed that this was a possession issue seeing how the initial posts were worded, lets see what the OP comes back with.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

2 hours ago, Going through said:

There's nothing a lawyer can do to change immigration laws---or make him suddenly admissible where there is no waiver available for his charges.

 

If he's already been convicted of the trafficking charge (and seems like he has) in certain circumstances (ie. less than 30g possession)  he may be able to get what's called Post-Conviction Relief---- for example requesting the charges be vacated, or claiming an ineffective lawyer at the time of his trial.  If Post-Conviction Relief is actually granted, then he may be able to challenge the CO's decision.  It's a long-shot at best, though, to be honest.

 

 

The wording of INA 212(a)(2)(C) is not actually dependent on conviction though - so its a really long shot. And 3 different ineligibility sections were cited. Possibly all related to the same crime, but it’s hard to know, and certainly more to have to overcome.

 

8 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I certainly assumed that this was a possession issue seeing how the initial posts were worded, lets see what the OP comes back with.

Quite possible the husband was not totally forthright with his in-laws about what he had actually been involved in.

Edited October 20, 2018 by SusieQQQ