Inadmissiblity - PR application

[Femlala]

Hi everyone

I have a PR paper application currently processing under the PNP stream, but I have a question with regards to criminal inadmissibility.

I was arrested for a dui in november 8 2015 in Canada (- I know I was stupid and made a bad decision but I've learned pls don't judge). Short story is the disposition was a conditional discharge with 1 yr probation. I was not convicted for this crime and I successfully completed my probation too.

My question is will this be a problem with my PR application? I know that a conditional discharge doesn't mean the same as a conviction hence I'm not criminally inadmissible. Does anyone know someone that got a PR application approved with a similar case as me?

thanks guys

 

[LifeDreamer]

No it will not be a problem for your PR application. You should check yes for having been arrested, detained, incarcerated or put in jail in your background declaration and include a short summary of what you have put here.

 

[Femlala]

Thanks for responding. I did check yes in the background check part of my application.

 

[Femlala]

No it will not be a problem for your PR application. You should check yes for having been arrested, detained, incarcerated or put in jail in your background declaration and include a short summary of what you have put here.

@LifeDreamer this question does not say arrested, it only says "detained, incaserated or put in jail" and I was not detained for a DUI, neither was I incaserated nor put in jail. Are you sure this answer should be a yes? Again on the form it does not say "arrest", it only says detained, incacerated or put in jail.

 

[LifeDreamer]

arrested = detained.

+ you have already declared it in previous applications so changing your answer now will be taken as misrepresentation. However if you include the summary in LOE it will be okay because the information is already in the application packet.

 

[Femlala]

@LifeDreamer

I honestly didn't put yes because I thought arrested and detained are different. I only declared it in my work permit application because the question on work permit form specifically used the word arrested and I said yes and explained. I was so concerned about this and called cic call center and was told to reply CICs email to me to address my concerns. So in my original application on the schedule A, I said no and also when they asked me to fill another schedule A form I also said no. I think it will be a good idea to use the case specific inquiry to let them know why I said no and let them also know that I had declared it in my work permit and had no intentions of hiding it. Or what do you think? I don't want to have any issues with missrepresenration cos really arrested and detained aren't the same thing. It's really a grey area if you ask me

 

[singleman]

conditional discharge

To my knowledge; Conditional Discharge is NOT considered a crime which would prevent you from being a PR or sponsoring some1 from other country, as long as you completed the conditions set.

 

[Femlala]

@singleman

Thanks so much for your reply. I agree with you however the issue here is related to misrepresentation not the conditional discharge. Do you think I should have said yes to question 6 in the schedule A form? There it asked "detained, incacerated or jail". I was arrested for the dui and in my mind I believe arrested and detained are not the same. Also in my work permit application, I did declare this because the word used in work permit form says "arrested, charged ..."

What can I do now to avoid mistemisrepresent issues? Do I get an immigration lawyer or do I use the case specific form to address my concerns? Pls advise

Thanks again

 

[LifeDreamer]

@Femlala

The verbiage used in the schedule A application is very old and has been in that form since the 1990s and was never updated since. The rest of the applications contain modernized questions so you can see a shift where in the past they used to ask if you're convicted or have pending charges to the now much more inclusive question of ever being arrested or charged even if dismissed or found not guilty.

Legally speaking neither arrest or detention are questions of law but rather questions of fact, so a fact determination process must follow. Basically you should pay attention to any record that indicates you were arrested or detained and then released that maybe mentioned or implied from your documents.

Being arrested is a form of detention the difference is that detention is just that and arrest is detention for a criminal accusation or complaint. The exception is an investigative detention aka traffic stops as ruled by precedents. So the question about being detained is actually broader in definition than being arrested and includes instances where a person is detained by non-judicial powers or in various settings such as in airports, by mobs or militant groups ..etc. It also includes people ordered home detention.

Generally speaking, they're expecting to find your case in your application and not whether you understood the question or not. If you have already included details of your incident in your application in a letter of explanation or something similar, then there is nothing to worry about and there is no need to post any correction. If your application has nothing about your past incident then you should send a message to add the missing details in a short summary as you have previously done so in your previous visa applications. If you want to include an explanation why you didn't put it there that's fine too.

 

[Femlala]

@LifeDreamer

Thanks. I'm just trying to avoid misrepresentation by all means. Also keep in mind that I only declared this in the work permit application not on PR application cos the questions are different on both apllapplicns and forms

I think I will just use the web form to address this and let the officers accessing my application know why I said no and not that I intentionally meant to hide the arrest or DUI

 

[Lynou]

Hi,
17 years ago, I was arrested in the United States on suspicion of Dui, but I was never charged or brought to justice because the breathalyzer was in order. So I answered NO to the questions in Appendix A.Recently, I received a procedural fairness letter accusing me of misrepresenting my criminal background since "I answered NO to the question of whether I had previously been charged or subject to criminal prosecution while my FBI report shows that I was arrested and charged with DUI". My FBI report indicates the arrest, but no indication of indictment or conviction. Similarly, 9 months ago, sending my PC, I explained everything in a note.
furthermore, question 6b concerns subsequent convictions or pending charges and prosecutions, so no misrepresentation has been made.
I need your opinion please.
Thank you.

 

[singleman]

@singleman

Thanks so much for your reply. I agree with you however the issue here is related to misrepresentation not the conditional discharge. Do you think I should have said yes to question 6 in the schedule A form? There it asked "detained, incacerated or jail". I was arrested for the dui and in my mind I believe arrested and detained are not the same. Also in my work permit application, I did declare this because the word used in work permit form says "arrested, charged ..."

What can I do now to avoid mistemisrepresent issues? Do I get an immigration lawyer or do I use the case specific form to address my concerns? Pls advise

Thanks again

iT IS SIMPLE IF THERE WAS A q REG have u ever BEEN ARRESTED? aNSWER COULD BE = no BUT WE DONT SEE SUCH q . Conviction if happened should have been answered yes.

 

[singleman]

Hi,
17 years ago, I was arrested in the United States on suspicion of Dui, but I was never charged or brought to justice because the breathalyzer was in order. So I answered NO to the questions in Appendix A.Recently, I received a procedural fairness letter accusing me of misrepresenting my criminal background since "I answered NO to the question of whether I had previously been charged or subject to criminal prosecution while my FBI report shows that I was arrested and charged with DUI". My FBI report indicates the arrest, but no indication of indictment or conviction. Similarly, 9 months ago, sending my PC, I explained everything in a note.
furthermore, question 6b concerns subsequent convictions or pending charges and prosecutions, so no misrepresentation has been made.
I need your opinion please.
Thank you.

CHARGED? and U were? then they are right if you wrote =NO May talk to immi/criminal Lawyer.
Worst come to worst there is 5 year ban they can impose, after 5 years if U reapply write all the truth as you wrote above in sep letter of explaination. Even such letter can be uploaded and see what is outcome?

 

[Lynou]

C’est pourquoi j’ai répondu NON et la question est très claire: avez-vous été déclaré coupable ou êtes-vous actuellement inculpé, jugé pour avoir participé à un crime ou à un délit, ou fait l’objet de poursuites pénales?

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Hi,
17 years ago, I was arrested in the United States on suspicion of Dui, but I was never charged or brought to justice because the breathalyzer was in order. So I answered NO to the questions in Appendix A.Recently, I received a procedural fairness letter accusing me of misrepresenting my criminal background since "I answered NO to the question of whether I had previously been charged or subject to criminal prosecution while my FBI report shows that I was arrested and charged with DUI". My FBI report indicates the arrest, but no indication of indictment or conviction. Similarly, 9 months ago, sending my PC, I explained everything in a note.
furthermore, question 6b concerns subsequent convictions or pending charges and prosecutions, so no misrepresentation has been made.
I need your opinion please.
Thank you.

If you answered No to Question 6j, then you committed misrepresentation. As explained above, arrested = detained.