Deferred DUI in USA

[Dougmeadows]

And then, there's this:

http://www.cicnews.com/2014/09/criminal-inadmissibility-canada-famous-fallible-093753.html

Some sentences are not considered convictions for the purposes of Canadian immigration. Examples of non-convictions include deferred adjudication, conditional discharge, dismissed charges, and nolle prosequi. Sentencing, however, varies between jurisdictions, including the states that make up the United States. An attorney can let an individual know if the outcome of a case resulted in a conviction for the purposes of Canadian immigration, and prepare a legal opinion for the person to take to the Canadian border.


Gotta love the ambiguity between Google search results!

The law firm in the link you posted is the law firm who did my legal opinion. I have lots of documentation proving the favorable outcome such as a clean FBI background check and the legal opinion (which contains all my documentation)


Do you think I will have a successful PR app?

 

[Ponga]

I honestly have no idea if you will be approved for PR. I do know that Canada takes things like DUI very seriously; far more seriously than the U.S. does.

Your case being ultimately dismissed, should be an important factor in your situation, but...will it be? The fact is that when you were stopped and found to be too drunk to drive, you were in essence breaking the law, right? The fact that your state allowed you to obtain the Deferred Adjudication doesn't really change the fact that you were driving drunk. Another person in a state where that same program would not be available to him/her would not have been so lucky. Arguably, you were very lucky.

So, in my eyes the real question is how Canada sees a case such as this where just because you were caught driving under the influence in a state with such a generous `penalty', does that lessen the fact that you did break the law?


You can continue to ask this question, ad nauseam, and will continue to drive yourself crazy. Or...you can just take solace knowing that what's done is done and that being totally honest about it in your application really is all that you can do. The entire process is quite stressful, so let this part of it go...because it's totally out of your hands now.

 

[Dougmeadows]

I honestly have no idea if you will be approved for PR. I do know that Canada takes things like DUI very seriously; far more seriously than the U.S. does.

Your case being ultimately dismissed, should be an important factor in your situation, but...will it be? The fact is that when you were stopped and found to be too drunk to drive, you were in essence breaking the law, right? The fact that your state allowed you to obtain the Deferred Adjudication doesn't really change the fact that you were driving drunk. Another person in a state where that same program would not be available to him/her would not have been so lucky. Arguably, you were very lucky.

So, in my eyes the real question is how Canada sees a case such as this where just because you were caught driving under the influence in a state with such a generous `penalty', does that lessen the fact that you did break the law?


You can continue to ask this question, ad nauseam, and will continue to drive yourself crazy. Or...you can just take solace knowing that what's done is done and that being totally honest about it in your application really is all that you can do. The entire process is quite stressful, so let this part of it go...because it's totally out of your hands now.

I will just send all documents I have (clean FBI check, legal opinion letter and court dockets) and hope it goes well!

From what I read deferred adjudication is not a barrier to becoming a PR!

 

[Ponga]

I will just send all documents I have (clean FBI check, legal opinion letter and court dockets) and hope it goes well!

From what I read deferred adjudication is not a barrier to becoming a PR!

Then why do you keep asking the same question?

Good luck!

 

[Dougmeadows]

Then why do you keep asking the same question?

Good luck!

Piece of mind. I wish I could find someone who has had the same problem.

 

[Ponga]

Piece of mind. I wish I could find someone who has had the same problem.

It must be nerve-racking, to say the least!

To add to the vortex...you're also [somewhat] at the mercy of the person working on your file. If s/he `thinks' that the adjudication still makes you inadmissible, it may, at best, delay the process for you. Much of the process on CIC's part seems to boil down to how the officer interprets their own rules...which is a conversation best avoided here!

As stressful as this must be, this too shall pass.

 

[Cdnpr2017]

I am in the same boat. I am applying tomorrow. This is from my legal opinion letter. This is the page the VO will use to assess you from my understanding. It has the US dispositions listed


It may not be very clear on here but it is page 63 of the enf2/op 18 evaluating inadmisibilty section 15.2

 

[Cdnpr2017]

You can truthfully answer "no" to being convicted. You just need to explain how your charge was dismissed. Deferred adjudication is not a conviction as far as Canadian immigration goes. Lawyers all write these letters for a reason.

 

[Cdnpr2017]

@ponga is giving out inaccurate information. An officer can't just deny you PR because that is how they interspersed a situation. There is guide lines for this specific situation

 

[Ponga]

@ponga is giving out inaccurate information. An officer can't just deny you PR because that is how they interspersed a situation. There is guide lines for this specific situation

No, @ponga is NOT giving out inaccurate information.

People have in fact been denied entry and even re-entry into Canada, based on the officer's interpretation...even their mood can play a factor in their `assessment' of the foreign national's admissibility.


I do agree that the OP can in fact answer `No' to any question about being convicted, but s/he MUST answer yes to questions asking about being detained or arrested.

 

[Cdnpr2017]

No, @ponga is NOT giving out inaccurate information.

People have in fact been denied entry and even re-entry into Canada, based on the officer's interpretation...even their mood can play a factor in their `assessment' of the foreign national's admissibility.


I do agree that the OP can in fact answer `No' to any question about being convicted, but s/he MUST answer yes to questions asking about being detained or arrested.

It is stated in the enf2 that deferred adjudication is not grounds for denying pr

 

[Ponga]

Please show me where I said that it would be grounds for refusal. If you bothered to read through the entirety of this thread, you'd have seen that this is one of those `unique' questions that hasn't really been answered by those of us that are simply offering opinions.

I refer you to one of my previous posts here:
http://www.temporaryresidentpermitcanada.com/deferred.php

"An American participating in a deferred adjudication program can be denied entry to Canada due to criminality. Similar to deferred prosecution programs, pretrial diversion programs can also enable an individual with a first offense DUI to avoid a criminal record. A pretrial diversion program does not require the defendant to plead guilty or "no contest" since the case does not actually go to trial unless the accused fails to meet the program's conditions. Even without a guilty plea, however, any DUI deferral or other similar program such as pretrial intervention (PTI), accelerated pretrial rehabilitation, or accelerated rehabilitative disposition, can render an American criminally inadmissible to Canada. There is no presumption of innocence when it comes to Canadian immigration, which means that any foreign national who has been arrested for DWI risks a Canadian border denial until they have documented proof of a favorable outcome."


Now, perhaps the law firm that posted that information was wrong, but I never said that it was gospel.

 

[Cdnpr2017]

Please show me where I said that it would be grounds for refusal. If you bothered to read through the entirety of this thread, you'd have seen that this is one of those `unique' questions that hasn't really been answered by those of us that are simply offering opinions.

I refer you to one of my previous posts here:
http://www.temporaryresidentpermitcanada.com/deferred.php

"An American participating in a deferred adjudication program can be denied entry to Canada due to criminality. Similar to deferred prosecution programs, pretrial diversion programs can also enable an individual with a first offense DUI to avoid a criminal record. A pretrial diversion program does not require the defendant to plead guilty or "no contest" since the case does not actually go to trial unless the accused fails to meet the program's conditions. Even without a guilty plea, however, any DUI deferral or other similar program such as pretrial intervention (PTI), accelerated pretrial rehabilitation, or accelerated rehabilitative disposition, can render an American criminally inadmissible to Canada. There is no presumption of innocence when it comes to Canadian immigration, which means that any foreign national who has been arrested for DWI risks a Canadian border denial until they have documented proof of a favorable outcome."


Now, perhaps the law firm that posted that information was wrong, but I never said that it was gospel.

I never said that you said it would. Actually, since i did read the whole post i'l quote where you said "IMHO,you should be fine".

I do not think an officer can deny you pr for something like this when there is guidelines in the ENF2 that specifically state this is not a conviction for the purposed of Canadian immigration.

As for the highlighted part of your post, the key word is "participating" OP has stated that he has completed his program successfully without a conviction on record.

He has also stated he has documented proof to show a favorable outcome, which includes a legal opinion letter from a Canadian Immigration Lawyer.



I also doubt that the law firm is wrong, unless of course all these ones are wrong as well:

http://www.cicnews.com/2014/09/criminal-inadmissibility-canada-famous-fallible-093753.html

http://www.canadaduientrylaw.com/diversion.php

http://www.duicanadaentry.com/how-do-i-know-if-i-am-criminally-inadmissible/

http://www.ronaleecareylaw.ca/newsletter-archive/45-overcoming-criminal-inadmissiblity

http://www.canadaentrydui.com/entry-canada-dui/duis-conditional-discharge-programs/

https://www.canadavisa.com/immigration-problem-criminal-inadmissibility.html



I hope no one has to do as much research on this as I have had too

 

[Ponga]

I also doubt that the law firm is wrong, unless of course all these ones are wrong as well:

http://www.cicnews.com/2014/09/criminal-inadmissibility-canada-famous-fallible-093753.html

http://www.canadaduientrylaw.com/diversion.php

http://www.duicanadaentry.com/how-do-i-know-if-i-am-criminally-inadmissible/

http://www.ronaleecareylaw.ca/newsletter-archive/45-overcoming-criminal-inadmissiblity

http://www.canadaentrydui.com/entry-canada-dui/duis-conditional-discharge-programs/

https://www.canadavisa.com/immigration-problem-criminal-inadmissibility.html



I hope no one has to do as much research on this as I have had too

Well, how can they be right, if ENF2 is also right?

 

[Cdnpr2017]

Well, how can they be right, if ENF2 is also right?

What you just said does not even make sense. Elaborate please?