Hannah B

Milania86, my understanding is that the rules vary from state to state. I currently live in Arkansas. When I first moved here in 2013 I researched this issue and found that I was permitted to drive on my UK license for 6 months. During that 6 months I was also pulled over by the police. At that time I had applied for my provisional license in Arkansas but had to wait 30 days to take the practical test. The police officer accused me of driving on a suspended USA license which wasn't true. I told him I was driving on a UK license and was within the 6 month period where I was permitted by Arkansas law to do so. He told me he didn't know anything about those rules and he gave me a court date and told me to explain it to the Judge. I was very upset. I went to the local revenue office who issues licenses and they confirmed the police officer was wrong and that I should contact the chief of police of the town where I was stopped. I did that and after he looked into it he said there had been a computer error and everything got dropped.
My advice would be to call the dmv of your town and ask them how long you can drive on your UK license. The officer may be correct if you have been residing in Florida for some time and you did not get a Florida license. Driving on your UK license is only a short term option.

Lizzyfjt, I feel so bad for your situation. You have been treated very poorly. The medical bills here are so outrageous. I will share a couple of my experiences with you and what I did when I didn't have health insurance for the benefit of others in similar situations.
I have lived here about 16 months. It took a while to get on my feet as I had serious marriage issues and then separated from my now ex-husband. This led to me not being able to afford health insurance immediately. Last summer, I had agonizing toothache. It was a Saturday night and I tried to hold off until Monday to see a dentist but couldn't so in the early hours of the Sunday morning I went to the ER to request a pain killer to see me over until Monday. I was in and out of the hospital in about 5 minutes. The dr. didn't examine me since he wasn't a dentist. He simply signed the prescription. I purchased the prescription for about $25. I then received multiple bills for my ER visit totaling around $1,000 split between the hospital bill and physicians bill. I thought this was crazy and totally disproportionate to the treatment I required, a signature for a prescription. The physicians bill was the largest and I disputed the bill with them, wrote them several letters but they didn't respond. They then turned me over to the collection agency. I paid the bill in the end because I was worried about the effect it would have on building credit.
In March this year I broke my ankle. Another trip to the ER. I sat and waited for about 6 hours to be seen then I was put in the hallway. A doctor asked me what the problem was and I said I think I broke my ankle. He said he would order an xray. The xray was done. Then the doctor returned and said my ankle was broken and the nurse would wrap it in a splint and I should make an appointment in a week to see an orthopaedic dr to have a cast put on. The nurse put my leg in a splint. The medical bills for this totaled around $3000. For the hospital bill when I received it I called the hospital and asked if they had any discounts they could use on the bill if I paid promptly and because I didn't have health insurance. They worked with me and reduced the bill by about 55%. When I received the dr's bill it had a $300 charge for putting on the splint. This made me really mad because the dr. didn't even put the splint on. I contacted the dr.'s billing center and told them the hospital had worked with me and they agreed to apply the same discounts if I sent them a copy of the hospital bill showing the discounts that were applied. In my letter I also disputed the charge relating to the application of the splint. They also gave me a 55% discount but didn't remove the splint charge. I paid it so get the whole ordeal over with. Another thing to point out that surprised me was the multiple bills I received, one from the hospital, one from a company who performed the xray, one from a company who provided the medical supplied, crutches etc. and one from the physician. It was very stressful as I didn't know when the bills would end.
I then got a pay rise in my job and applied for health insurance through Obamacare. I was able to get a $100 credit by going through the marketplace on any plan I chose. Luckily I haven't had to use it but having had two trips to the ER in the last 12 months it is added security. One thing to be aware of though with health insurance is the difference between "in network" and "out of network". My colleague at work (a USC) had comprehensive health insurance, her family pay over $1,000 per month for their plan. She had an operation which she thought would be covered by her health insurance (minus the deductible) and several weeks after the surgery she received a bill of $8000 for a monitoring service who monitored her during the surgery and were considered out of network so her health insurance won't cover it. She is also disputing it.
It is a minefield out there and if a medical problem happens to you it is very stressful.
Lizzyfjt I hope you are able to find a resolution. The medical bills if they don't get paid can have a negative effect on your credit but it has nothing to do with immigration and they cannot threaten deportation on you.

Hey guys just letting y'all know today I got green card in mail. Thx to Sandra for all the hard work and patience And to my vj family for the support. You guys will get yours soon just continue to out god first. Am still here not leaving forum. Will always be checking in on you guys.

Hi there,
I am in a similar position myself and have done some research on this issue over the past few years and here's what I have found out:
Every State in America has individual rules on who is permitted to take their Bar exam to be able to practice law. If you have a law degree from an American law school (a "JD"), which usually takes 3 years full time then you are able to sit the Bar exam in any State.
There are only two States that have more flexible rules for those who have international law degrees and that is New York and California. To take the New York Bar the criteria is that you must have a law degree whether it be from either America or your foreign country. To find out if the law degree from your home country is acceptable then you must send your transcripts to the New York State Bar Association for them to be assessed. I have a UK law degree and I have been through this process and have received formal notice from New York that I am eligible to take their Bar exam.
For California you must also be a practising lawyer/attorney in your relevant country as well as providing proof of your foreign law degree.
For all other States the rules are more strict. Many States have reciprocal agreements with each other. For examples, if you have been practising in one State for X amount of years then you are eligible to take the Bar in another State. If you wish to practice in a State other than New York or California, then one way to transfer is to practice in either of those States for a certain amount of years and then transfer. However I would suggest that you check the criteria for the particular State where your partner will be moving to so that you can be sure of what the relevant criteria is. You can do this online. I would google "State Bar exam rules" or something like that as I can't remember the precise website I found.
One further thing to add. I have heard of examples of ways around the rules. For example, the Southern States tend to have the more strict rules about foreign attorneys and even if you have practised in another country or state they don't tend to let you in easily. I have, however, heard of cases where a person has approached Universities in these areas and have been able to negotiate with the Law School to only complete a limited number of credits to receive an America Law Degree and thus overcome the cost and 3-year time period which make repeating law school impossible. I know of people who have done this with the University of Arkansas, and Washburn University in Kansas and they were only required to complete 1 year or 18 months I believe. I also know of cases where someone has worked in the legal field as a paralegal/investigator for quite a few years in Nashville, Tennesse and was granted permission to take their Bar exam without an American Law degree. A few years ago I spoke with a Canadian immigration lawyer on this issue and he advised that if you apply to take a Bar exam and you don't fit the criteria because you only have a foreign law degree then you will automatically be refused. But, if you then appeal the decision and present all of your evidence of foreign qualification and practice then you are much more likely to succeed in an application to take the Bar exam during the appeal process. I have not tried this myself so can't speak from experience, but just wanted to pass on what I had been told by someone who did succeed that way. He is now practising in Arizona which I understand has very strict rules on foreign attorneys practising there.
One more thing - once you have been granted permission to take the Bar exam, then preparing for the exam itself and passing are another matter and no easy task at all, even for an experienced attorney. You must understand the State law of the exam you are taking as well as Federal law. You can take a preparation course called the "Bar Bri" in every State but this would be very challenging for someone with no prior knowledge of American law and/or where there is a language barrier. There is loads of information about the exams and the preparation courses online you can check out.
Hope that helps.

And one more thing. Generally speaking, a person can only be found not guilty and "let off" on a technicality for offences where they may appear to be guilty where there is a technical element to the evidence. For example where a police search or an identification parade or foresnic testing was not conducted properly or a speed camera was faulty. In cases like common assault, and sexual assault where there is no evidence of physcial injury it often comes down to one person's word against another so much less likely that anyone looking at their case would be able to make a decision that you were guilty but had been found not guilty on a techincality.

I am a criminal defence solicitor in England so can offer a little insight. When a person's police record is printed (known as a "PNC") there is a cover page stating number of convictions. For you this will say zero. Also within the report will be the details of any court cases and the outcome. In your case the details of the Court and charges on the indictment will be listed and a "Not Guilty" plea will be stated by each of them. You can obtain this from your local police station as a starting point. I haven't yet obtained a copy of the police records that are used for the interview so I can't tell you what the format is but I suspect it will list the same information.
As far as I am aware from the various stages of the K1 visa, you will be asked to confirm if you have ever been "arrested" for a criminal offence and to provide the details so you would not be able to hide it. Unless you are planning to hire an lawyer experienced in this type of case then I think all you can do at this is gather as much documentation as you can. As a few suggestions:
1. In the first instance I would do some research on this website by using the search function to see how this type of issue has been dealt with by other beneficiaries from the UK who have gone through the process. They may be able to offer you some insight.
2. Research the forms you will be required to complete during the K1 process if thats the route you are choosing and you will be able to see precisely how the questions are phrased in relation to criminal convictions/charges/arrests etc.
3. I presumme you were represented by a criminal defence solicitor (and a Barrister if the case was heard in the Crown Court). The solicitors are required to keep their file for 7 years. So I would contact them and ask for a copy of all the disclousre provided by the Crown Prosecution Service. This will include: advance disclosure, the main committal bundle, unused material (this is evidence gathered by the police that the Crown do not choose to rely upon in Court, so often is useful to the defence), your police interview and any attendance notes of the trial itself. This shouldn't take very long for the solicitors to provide depending on where they store their archived files.
4. You could go one step further if you wanted to and apply for a copy of the trial transcript. The way most courts work now is that trial transcripts are kept on tape and stored by a private transcription company. It is less common that the Court actually retains transrcipts themselves because it is so expensive. To do this you would need to write to the Chief Clerk at the relevant Court where the trial took place and provide them with the case number, your name, the dates of your trial, and the Judge who heard the case. Ask the Court where the tapes/or transcripts are held and they should provide you with the company who has them. The contact that company and request a copy of the transcript. There is usually a fee for providing you with a copy and for a four day trial this may be approximately £30-100. I have done this for a few cases where the details of what was said at trial are disputed and it has taken at least a few weeks to obtain so allow time for this if you think you will need it.

I am a criminal defence solicitor in England so can offer a little insight. When a person's police record is printed (known as a "PNC") there is a cover page stating number of convictions. For you this will say zero. Also within the report will be the details of any court cases and the outcome. In your case the details of the Court and charges on the indictment will be listed and a "Not Guilty" plea will be stated by each of them. You can obtain this from your local police station as a starting point. I haven't yet obtained a copy of the police records that are used for the interview so I can't tell you what the format is but I suspect it will list the same information.
As far as I am aware from the various stages of the K1 visa, you will be asked to confirm if you have ever been "arrested" for a criminal offence and to provide the details so you would not be able to hide it. Unless you are planning to hire an lawyer experienced in this type of case then I think all you can do at this is gather as much documentation as you can. As a few suggestions:
1. In the first instance I would do some research on this website by using the search function to see how this type of issue has been dealt with by other beneficiaries from the UK who have gone through the process. They may be able to offer you some insight.
2. Research the forms you will be required to complete during the K1 process if thats the route you are choosing and you will be able to see precisely how the questions are phrased in relation to criminal convictions/charges/arrests etc.
3. I presumme you were represented by a criminal defence solicitor (and a Barrister if the case was heard in the Crown Court). The solicitors are required to keep their file for 7 years. So I would contact them and ask for a copy of all the disclousre provided by the Crown Prosecution Service. This will include: advance disclosure, the main committal bundle, unused material (this is evidence gathered by the police that the Crown do not choose to rely upon in Court, so often is useful to the defence), your police interview and any attendance notes of the trial itself. This shouldn't take very long for the solicitors to provide depending on where they store their archived files.
4. You could go one step further if you wanted to and apply for a copy of the trial transcript. The way most courts work now is that trial transcripts are kept on tape and stored by a private transcription company. It is less common that the Court actually retains transrcipts themselves because it is so expensive. To do this you would need to write to the Chief Clerk at the relevant Court where the trial took place and provide them with the case number, your name, the dates of your trial, and the Judge who heard the case. Ask the Court where the tapes/or transcripts are held and they should provide you with the company who has them. The contact that company and request a copy of the transcript. There is usually a fee for providing you with a copy and for a four day trial this may be approximately £30-100. I have done this for a few cases where the details of what was said at trial are disputed and it has taken at least a few weeks to obtain so allow time for this if you think you will need it.

And one more thing. Generally speaking, a person can only be found not guilty and "let off" on a technicality for offences where they may appear to be guilty where there is a technical element to the evidence. For example where a police search or an identification parade or foresnic testing was not conducted properly or a speed camera was faulty. In cases like common assault, and sexual assault where there is no evidence of physcial injury it often comes down to one person's word against another so much less likely that anyone looking at their case would be able to make a decision that you were guilty but had been found not guilty on a techincality.

And one more thing. Generally speaking, a person can only be found not guilty and "let off" on a technicality for offences where they may appear to be guilty where there is a technical element to the evidence. For example where a police search or an identification parade or foresnic testing was not conducted properly or a speed camera was faulty. In cases like common assault, and sexual assault where there is no evidence of physcial injury it often comes down to one person's word against another so much less likely that anyone looking at their case would be able to make a decision that you were guilty but had been found not guilty on a techincality.

I am a criminal defence solicitor in England so can offer a little insight. When a person's police record is printed (known as a "PNC") there is a cover page stating number of convictions. For you this will say zero. Also within the report will be the details of any court cases and the outcome. In your case the details of the Court and charges on the indictment will be listed and a "Not Guilty" plea will be stated by each of them. You can obtain this from your local police station as a starting point. I haven't yet obtained a copy of the police records that are used for the interview so I can't tell you what the format is but I suspect it will list the same information.
As far as I am aware from the various stages of the K1 visa, you will be asked to confirm if you have ever been "arrested" for a criminal offence and to provide the details so you would not be able to hide it. Unless you are planning to hire an lawyer experienced in this type of case then I think all you can do at this is gather as much documentation as you can. As a few suggestions:
1. In the first instance I would do some research on this website by using the search function to see how this type of issue has been dealt with by other beneficiaries from the UK who have gone through the process. They may be able to offer you some insight.
2. Research the forms you will be required to complete during the K1 process if thats the route you are choosing and you will be able to see precisely how the questions are phrased in relation to criminal convictions/charges/arrests etc.
3. I presumme you were represented by a criminal defence solicitor (and a Barrister if the case was heard in the Crown Court). The solicitors are required to keep their file for 7 years. So I would contact them and ask for a copy of all the disclousre provided by the Crown Prosecution Service. This will include: advance disclosure, the main committal bundle, unused material (this is evidence gathered by the police that the Crown do not choose to rely upon in Court, so often is useful to the defence), your police interview and any attendance notes of the trial itself. This shouldn't take very long for the solicitors to provide depending on where they store their archived files.
4. You could go one step further if you wanted to and apply for a copy of the trial transcript. The way most courts work now is that trial transcripts are kept on tape and stored by a private transcription company. It is less common that the Court actually retains transrcipts themselves because it is so expensive. To do this you would need to write to the Chief Clerk at the relevant Court where the trial took place and provide them with the case number, your name, the dates of your trial, and the Judge who heard the case. Ask the Court where the tapes/or transcripts are held and they should provide you with the company who has them. The contact that company and request a copy of the transcript. There is usually a fee for providing you with a copy and for a four day trial this may be approximately £30-100. I have done this for a few cases where the details of what was said at trial are disputed and it has taken at least a few weeks to obtain so allow time for this if you think you will need it.

And one more thing. Generally speaking, a person can only be found not guilty and "let off" on a technicality for offences where they may appear to be guilty where there is a technical element to the evidence. For example where a police search or an identification parade or foresnic testing was not conducted properly or a speed camera was faulty. In cases like common assault, and sexual assault where there is no evidence of physcial injury it often comes down to one person's word against another so much less likely that anyone looking at their case would be able to make a decision that you were guilty but had been found not guilty on a techincality.

I am a criminal defence solicitor in England so can offer a little insight. When a person's police record is printed (known as a "PNC") there is a cover page stating number of convictions. For you this will say zero. Also within the report will be the details of any court cases and the outcome. In your case the details of the Court and charges on the indictment will be listed and a "Not Guilty" plea will be stated by each of them. You can obtain this from your local police station as a starting point. I haven't yet obtained a copy of the police records that are used for the interview so I can't tell you what the format is but I suspect it will list the same information.
As far as I am aware from the various stages of the K1 visa, you will be asked to confirm if you have ever been "arrested" for a criminal offence and to provide the details so you would not be able to hide it. Unless you are planning to hire an lawyer experienced in this type of case then I think all you can do at this is gather as much documentation as you can. As a few suggestions:
1. In the first instance I would do some research on this website by using the search function to see how this type of issue has been dealt with by other beneficiaries from the UK who have gone through the process. They may be able to offer you some insight.
2. Research the forms you will be required to complete during the K1 process if thats the route you are choosing and you will be able to see precisely how the questions are phrased in relation to criminal convictions/charges/arrests etc.
3. I presumme you were represented by a criminal defence solicitor (and a Barrister if the case was heard in the Crown Court). The solicitors are required to keep their file for 7 years. So I would contact them and ask for a copy of all the disclousre provided by the Crown Prosecution Service. This will include: advance disclosure, the main committal bundle, unused material (this is evidence gathered by the police that the Crown do not choose to rely upon in Court, so often is useful to the defence), your police interview and any attendance notes of the trial itself. This shouldn't take very long for the solicitors to provide depending on where they store their archived files.
4. You could go one step further if you wanted to and apply for a copy of the trial transcript. The way most courts work now is that trial transcripts are kept on tape and stored by a private transcription company. It is less common that the Court actually retains transrcipts themselves because it is so expensive. To do this you would need to write to the Chief Clerk at the relevant Court where the trial took place and provide them with the case number, your name, the dates of your trial, and the Judge who heard the case. Ask the Court where the tapes/or transcripts are held and they should provide you with the company who has them. The contact that company and request a copy of the transcript. There is usually a fee for providing you with a copy and for a four day trial this may be approximately £30-100. I have done this for a few cases where the details of what was said at trial are disputed and it has taken at least a few weeks to obtain so allow time for this if you think you will need it.

Hi, I am a UK beneficiary and I have a few similaries in my case but I am still in the beginning stages of the K1 process so I will offer what little advise I can for you and for the benefit of others with complicated circumstances I will set out some of the details of my case. I have known my fiance (USC) for 13 years. We dated whilst I was living in the US as a student and have been friends ever since I returned to the UK. He experienced some mental health issues when he was in his early 20's which resulted in a suicide attempt and after some time was eventually diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He became involved with a family he had known since childhood and to cut a very long story short, this led to some unfortunate circumstances. He became involved with the father and son of this family who were heavily involved in drugs (who are now serving very lengthy prison sentences). My fiance became pretty dependent on cannabis during this time as a coping mechanism for his bipolar and was found in the possession of a small quantity of cannabis on two occassions. He also had a short-lived relationship with the daughter who was physcially abusive towards him. Everytime he tried to leave that situation she called the police and said he had hit her. It was a bad cycle which he is fortunately out of but from that bad patch of a couple of years has resulted in some relevant criminal convictions for the I-129F(the possession of cannabis, DWI and misdeamour assault on his ex-wife). It sound horrendous I know and my objection is not to minimise these types of convictions as I understand they are serious. However it is difficult to explain his past in a nutshell so publicly on a website so I just say for now that he has a complex past and has made huge mistakes but has been on the right track with his life for quite a few years now.
Anyway, I explain this because for the purpose of us considering options to be together and get married we too were really nervous about how this would effect our application and whether it would be more suitable to apply for the K1 or get married and go through the spousal visa route. I also looked into the option of adjusting from a tourist visa before I quickly realised it was a high risk option and illegal if you enter for the purposes of marrying and intending to stay (although you can enter on a tourist visa, get married, leave and wait out the spousal visa route from your home country).
From the research I have done I understand that the petitioner having certain criminal convictions (you can find the list of them on the I-129F form) means that there is legislation which places an obligation upon USCIS to be satsfied the beneficiary is aware of a petitioner's criminal past when granting a K1 visa to avoid potential abuse of foreign spouses who marry and move to the US without knowing about these convictions. Unless the convictions are so serious (certain sexual offences and offences against children that fall under the Adam Walsh Act) then the convictions of the petitioner by themselves do not make the petitoner ineligble for pursuing the K1 route, as long as they meet all the standard requirements. However as a result I will expect to be questioned in detail about my fiance's past when it comes to the interview stage. We have also gone to the courthouse together to get certified copies of his convictions which we sent with our application and I have a copy of them for myself. We are still really nervous that this will cause problems for our NOA2 or at the very least will result in delays. But we are almost four months into the waiting game so we shall just have to wait and see.
We didn't decide to go down the spousal visa route (CR-1) but I understand that the petitioner's criminal convictions do not need to be disclosed for the initial application (I-130). I am quite new to this website so I expect others who have chosen this route will be able to offer more comprehensive advice.
I think I am right in saying that you have not yet met your partner is that right? One of the requriements of the K1 visa is to have met in person at least once in the two years immediately prior to filing the initial application and you have to provide evidence of that. This may be more challenging if you are visiting him in prison so you would need to check the requirements of what examples of evidence you could provide. There are really good guides on this forum to explain each option and the pros and cons so you can weight up your options and choose what suits your situation best. Either way be prepared to wait and wait and wait! But I have seen many people ask the question about marrying and staying on a tourist visa and the advice from everyone on this website is don't do it. Its illegal if its planned and high risk.
Hope that helps.

Hi, I am a UK beneficiary and I have a few similaries in my case but I am still in the beginning stages of the K1 process so I will offer what little advise I can for you and for the benefit of others with complicated circumstances I will set out some of the details of my case. I have known my fiance (USC) for 13 years. We dated whilst I was living in the US as a student and have been friends ever since I returned to the UK. He experienced some mental health issues when he was in his early 20's which resulted in a suicide attempt and after some time was eventually diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He became involved with a family he had known since childhood and to cut a very long story short, this led to some unfortunate circumstances. He became involved with the father and son of this family who were heavily involved in drugs (who are now serving very lengthy prison sentences). My fiance became pretty dependent on cannabis during this time as a coping mechanism for his bipolar and was found in the possession of a small quantity of cannabis on two occassions. He also had a short-lived relationship with the daughter who was physcially abusive towards him. Everytime he tried to leave that situation she called the police and said he had hit her. It was a bad cycle which he is fortunately out of but from that bad patch of a couple of years has resulted in some relevant criminal convictions for the I-129F(the possession of cannabis, DWI and misdeamour assault on his ex-wife). It sound horrendous I know and my objection is not to minimise these types of convictions as I understand they are serious. However it is difficult to explain his past in a nutshell so publicly on a website so I just say for now that he has a complex past and has made huge mistakes but has been on the right track with his life for quite a few years now.
Anyway, I explain this because for the purpose of us considering options to be together and get married we too were really nervous about how this would effect our application and whether it would be more suitable to apply for the K1 or get married and go through the spousal visa route. I also looked into the option of adjusting from a tourist visa before I quickly realised it was a high risk option and illegal if you enter for the purposes of marrying and intending to stay (although you can enter on a tourist visa, get married, leave and wait out the spousal visa route from your home country).
From the research I have done I understand that the petitioner having certain criminal convictions (you can find the list of them on the I-129F form) means that there is legislation which places an obligation upon USCIS to be satsfied the beneficiary is aware of a petitioner's criminal past when granting a K1 visa to avoid potential abuse of foreign spouses who marry and move to the US without knowing about these convictions. Unless the convictions are so serious (certain sexual offences and offences against children that fall under the Adam Walsh Act) then the convictions of the petitioner by themselves do not make the petitoner ineligble for pursuing the K1 route, as long as they meet all the standard requirements. However as a result I will expect to be questioned in detail about my fiance's past when it comes to the interview stage. We have also gone to the courthouse together to get certified copies of his convictions which we sent with our application and I have a copy of them for myself. We are still really nervous that this will cause problems for our NOA2 or at the very least will result in delays. But we are almost four months into the waiting game so we shall just have to wait and see.
We didn't decide to go down the spousal visa route (CR-1) but I understand that the petitioner's criminal convictions do not need to be disclosed for the initial application (I-130). I am quite new to this website so I expect others who have chosen this route will be able to offer more comprehensive advice.
I think I am right in saying that you have not yet met your partner is that right? One of the requriements of the K1 visa is to have met in person at least once in the two years immediately prior to filing the initial application and you have to provide evidence of that. This may be more challenging if you are visiting him in prison so you would need to check the requirements of what examples of evidence you could provide. There are really good guides on this forum to explain each option and the pros and cons so you can weight up your options and choose what suits your situation best. Either way be prepared to wait and wait and wait! But I have seen many people ask the question about marrying and staying on a tourist visa and the advice from everyone on this website is don't do it. Its illegal if its planned and high risk.
Hope that helps.

Hi, I am a UK beneficiary and I have a few similaries in my case but I am still in the beginning stages of the K1 process so I will offer what little advise I can for you and for the benefit of others with complicated circumstances I will set out some of the details of my case. I have known my fiance (USC) for 13 years. We dated whilst I was living in the US as a student and have been friends ever since I returned to the UK. He experienced some mental health issues when he was in his early 20's which resulted in a suicide attempt and after some time was eventually diagnosed with bipolar disorder. He became involved with a family he had known since childhood and to cut a very long story short, this led to some unfortunate circumstances. He became involved with the father and son of this family who were heavily involved in drugs (who are now serving very lengthy prison sentences). My fiance became pretty dependent on cannabis during this time as a coping mechanism for his bipolar and was found in the possession of a small quantity of cannabis on two occassions. He also had a short-lived relationship with the daughter who was physcially abusive towards him. Everytime he tried to leave that situation she called the police and said he had hit her. It was a bad cycle which he is fortunately out of but from that bad patch of a couple of years has resulted in some relevant criminal convictions for the I-129F(the possession of cannabis, DWI and misdeamour assault on his ex-wife). It sound horrendous I know and my objection is not to minimise these types of convictions as I understand they are serious. However it is difficult to explain his past in a nutshell so publicly on a website so I just say for now that he has a complex past and has made huge mistakes but has been on the right track with his life for quite a few years now.
Anyway, I explain this because for the purpose of us considering options to be together and get married we too were really nervous about how this would effect our application and whether it would be more suitable to apply for the K1 or get married and go through the spousal visa route. I also looked into the option of adjusting from a tourist visa before I quickly realised it was a high risk option and illegal if you enter for the purposes of marrying and intending to stay (although you can enter on a tourist visa, get married, leave and wait out the spousal visa route from your home country).
From the research I have done I understand that the petitioner having certain criminal convictions (you can find the list of them on the I-129F form) means that there is legislation which places an obligation upon USCIS to be satsfied the beneficiary is aware of a petitioner's criminal past when granting a K1 visa to avoid potential abuse of foreign spouses who marry and move to the US without knowing about these convictions. Unless the convictions are so serious (certain sexual offences and offences against children that fall under the Adam Walsh Act) then the convictions of the petitioner by themselves do not make the petitoner ineligble for pursuing the K1 route, as long as they meet all the standard requirements. However as a result I will expect to be questioned in detail about my fiance's past when it comes to the interview stage. We have also gone to the courthouse together to get certified copies of his convictions which we sent with our application and I have a copy of them for myself. We are still really nervous that this will cause problems for our NOA2 or at the very least will result in delays. But we are almost four months into the waiting game so we shall just have to wait and see.
We didn't decide to go down the spousal visa route (CR-1) but I understand that the petitioner's criminal convictions do not need to be disclosed for the initial application (I-130). I am quite new to this website so I expect others who have chosen this route will be able to offer more comprehensive advice.
I think I am right in saying that you have not yet met your partner is that right? One of the requriements of the K1 visa is to have met in person at least once in the two years immediately prior to filing the initial application and you have to provide evidence of that. This may be more challenging if you are visiting him in prison so you would need to check the requirements of what examples of evidence you could provide. There are really good guides on this forum to explain each option and the pros and cons so you can weight up your options and choose what suits your situation best. Either way be prepared to wait and wait and wait! But I have seen many people ask the question about marrying and staying on a tourist visa and the advice from everyone on this website is don't do it. Its illegal if its planned and high risk.
Hope that helps.

Hi there,
I am in a similar position myself and have done some research on this issue over the past few years and here's what I have found out:
Every State in America has individual rules on who is permitted to take their Bar exam to be able to practice law. If you have a law degree from an American law school (a "JD"), which usually takes 3 years full time then you are able to sit the Bar exam in any State.
There are only two States that have more flexible rules for those who have international law degrees and that is New York and California. To take the New York Bar the criteria is that you must have a law degree whether it be from either America or your foreign country. To find out if the law degree from your home country is acceptable then you must send your transcripts to the New York State Bar Association for them to be assessed. I have a UK law degree and I have been through this process and have received formal notice from New York that I am eligible to take their Bar exam.
For California you must also be a practising lawyer/attorney in your relevant country as well as providing proof of your foreign law degree.
For all other States the rules are more strict. Many States have reciprocal agreements with each other. For examples, if you have been practising in one State for X amount of years then you are eligible to take the Bar in another State. If you wish to practice in a State other than New York or California, then one way to transfer is to practice in either of those States for a certain amount of years and then transfer. However I would suggest that you check the criteria for the particular State where your partner will be moving to so that you can be sure of what the relevant criteria is. You can do this online. I would google "State Bar exam rules" or something like that as I can't remember the precise website I found.
One further thing to add. I have heard of examples of ways around the rules. For example, the Southern States tend to have the more strict rules about foreign attorneys and even if you have practised in another country or state they don't tend to let you in easily. I have, however, heard of cases where a person has approached Universities in these areas and have been able to negotiate with the Law School to only complete a limited number of credits to receive an America Law Degree and thus overcome the cost and 3-year time period which make repeating law school impossible. I know of people who have done this with the University of Arkansas, and Washburn University in Kansas and they were only required to complete 1 year or 18 months I believe. I also know of cases where someone has worked in the legal field as a paralegal/investigator for quite a few years in Nashville, Tennesse and was granted permission to take their Bar exam without an American Law degree. A few years ago I spoke with a Canadian immigration lawyer on this issue and he advised that if you apply to take a Bar exam and you don't fit the criteria because you only have a foreign law degree then you will automatically be refused. But, if you then appeal the decision and present all of your evidence of foreign qualification and practice then you are much more likely to succeed in an application to take the Bar exam during the appeal process. I have not tried this myself so can't speak from experience, but just wanted to pass on what I had been told by someone who did succeed that way. He is now practising in Arizona which I understand has very strict rules on foreign attorneys practising there.
One more thing - once you have been granted permission to take the Bar exam, then preparing for the exam itself and passing are another matter and no easy task at all, even for an experienced attorney. You must understand the State law of the exam you are taking as well as Federal law. You can take a preparation course called the "Bar Bri" in every State but this would be very challenging for someone with no prior knowledge of American law and/or where there is a language barrier. There is loads of information about the exams and the preparation courses online you can check out.
Hope that helps.

Hi there,
I am in a similar position myself and have done some research on this issue over the past few years and here's what I have found out:
Every State in America has individual rules on who is permitted to take their Bar exam to be able to practice law. If you have a law degree from an American law school (a "JD"), which usually takes 3 years full time then you are able to sit the Bar exam in any State.
There are only two States that have more flexible rules for those who have international law degrees and that is New York and California. To take the New York Bar the criteria is that you must have a law degree whether it be from either America or your foreign country. To find out if the law degree from your home country is acceptable then you must send your transcripts to the New York State Bar Association for them to be assessed. I have a UK law degree and I have been through this process and have received formal notice from New York that I am eligible to take their Bar exam.
For California you must also be a practising lawyer/attorney in your relevant country as well as providing proof of your foreign law degree.
For all other States the rules are more strict. Many States have reciprocal agreements with each other. For examples, if you have been practising in one State for X amount of years then you are eligible to take the Bar in another State. If you wish to practice in a State other than New York or California, then one way to transfer is to practice in either of those States for a certain amount of years and then transfer. However I would suggest that you check the criteria for the particular State where your partner will be moving to so that you can be sure of what the relevant criteria is. You can do this online. I would google "State Bar exam rules" or something like that as I can't remember the precise website I found.
One further thing to add. I have heard of examples of ways around the rules. For example, the Southern States tend to have the more strict rules about foreign attorneys and even if you have practised in another country or state they don't tend to let you in easily. I have, however, heard of cases where a person has approached Universities in these areas and have been able to negotiate with the Law School to only complete a limited number of credits to receive an America Law Degree and thus overcome the cost and 3-year time period which make repeating law school impossible. I know of people who have done this with the University of Arkansas, and Washburn University in Kansas and they were only required to complete 1 year or 18 months I believe. I also know of cases where someone has worked in the legal field as a paralegal/investigator for quite a few years in Nashville, Tennesse and was granted permission to take their Bar exam without an American Law degree. A few years ago I spoke with a Canadian immigration lawyer on this issue and he advised that if you apply to take a Bar exam and you don't fit the criteria because you only have a foreign law degree then you will automatically be refused. But, if you then appeal the decision and present all of your evidence of foreign qualification and practice then you are much more likely to succeed in an application to take the Bar exam during the appeal process. I have not tried this myself so can't speak from experience, but just wanted to pass on what I had been told by someone who did succeed that way. He is now practising in Arizona which I understand has very strict rules on foreign attorneys practising there.
One more thing - once you have been granted permission to take the Bar exam, then preparing for the exam itself and passing are another matter and no easy task at all, even for an experienced attorney. You must understand the State law of the exam you are taking as well as Federal law. You can take a preparation course called the "Bar Bri" in every State but this would be very challenging for someone with no prior knowledge of American law and/or where there is a language barrier. There is loads of information about the exams and the preparation courses online you can check out.
Hope that helps.