@dpenabill are you aware of tests without interviews and what would you recommend?
I am not acquainted with any other reports of test event without a PI Interview. So far as I have seen, IRCC information, including PDIs, make no mention of this.
@zardoz posed an apt question but the OP's response tends toward more not less confusion. In this regard, the OP's report and query lacks clarity. We can often readily infer what the situation is notwithstanding some difficulties with language. But matters involving criminal charges and potential prohibitions very much depend on precise details.
Thus, even though generally I avoid making recommendations (and try, rather, to offer what information I can, focusing as best I can on what is known rather than offering opinion or advice), but will repeat some of the more obvious, well-worn recommendations, I can offer the rather obvious one in this scenario: best to at least consult with a competent lawyer who understands how criminal charges can impact citizenship eligibility . . .
. . . UNLESS it is
certain that the charges will be
totally dismissed soon. If the charges are totally, unconditionally dismissed, that essentially is almost as if they were never brought.
The problem, however, is that many misunderstand what is actually happening in the court proceedings. Even those whose command of the language employed is at the higher end of the scale. Dispositions in criminal cases vary widely. Conditional discharges rather than total discharges are very common. The distinctions are often not clearly explained to defendants. When there is a conditional discharge, the details loom large and can make a huge difference in terms of whether it means a charge is technically still pending, or not. And that in turn can have an impact on whether the charge constitutes a prohibition that blocks eligibility for citizenship, or not.
If the charges are for sure being totally, unconditionally withdrawn, one can confidently conclude they will not constitute a prohibition. No prohibition, no obligation to disclose. That said, it is often better to proactively disclose and have any potential questions resolved sooner rather than later. But there is no rush to do that, and this is something that can often wait until the PI Interview, which it appears is when the OP intended to disclose it.
But apart from the potential complexities when criminal charges are involved (which again usually suggest the need to consult with competent counsel rather than rely on commentary in a forum like this), the situation is very unclear given the highly unusual report of no PI Interview attendant the test.
