Our case is somewhat complicated and I'd appreciate any advice/input from fellow VJers.
Here's the background:
I, the beneficiary, visited the US in June 2015 on a tourist visa, met and married my USC husband. It was a hasty, impulsive move and we quickly realized we were incompatible. Things got pretty bad between us, escalated to domestic brawls where the police was called and I was arrested for domestic violence. I pled guilty, paid a fine and was released the next day. There was a restraining order which has long since expired. I was 2 months pregnant when I returned to my country a few days after this event
The certificate of disposition says: "Sealed after Conviction, pursuant to Section 180:56 of the CPL. I'm not entirely sure what this means.
During the next couple of years, my husband and I worked on our relationship (long distance) for the sake of our daughter who became a US citizen through CRBA. Fast forward to 2017, we decided to give it one more try. My daughter and I flew to the US but I was denied entry because of obvious immigrant intent. My tourist visa was cancelled and I was advised to apply for a spouse visa.
My cancelled tourist visa says: "22,OFR 41-122 (h)(3)." Again, not sure what this means.
That same year, my husband filed the I130 but for various reasons (he was unemployed for a while, we were having arguments, etc.) we delayed the whole thing.
Now our relationship is pretty stable, we worked through our issues and are now a happy family, albeit a long-distance one. He visits at least twice a year, we talk and video call daily and life is great.
We were DQ'd in October 2021 and are currently waiting for the interview at Mumbai consulate.
At this point, we have been married for nearly 7 years, have a child together, meet regularly and are in constant touch. I am the beneficiary for his insurance policies and 401k and he files taxes as married filing separately.
My question is - Will my arrest and conviction record lead to a denial? Also, will the denied entry be a major stumbling block? Does our case have too many red flags?
Any answers will be appreciated.