2. If yes. Should I disclose it ?
The answer to this question is easy. Unless the offence occurred and was totally resolved more than four years ago, YES, it needs to be disclosed. (Whether an applicant might easily get away with not disclosing it, that is a separate question, which I'll leave for others to discuss.) In particular:
-- If the charge is in any way still pending, then YES, by checking yes in the box for question 16.3. "An offence outside Canada?"
-- If this is a charge that resulted in a conviction within the last four years, likewise YES, by checking yes in the box for question 16.8., similarly for an offence outside Canada.
Note: for offences outside Canada, the application requires applicants to disclose ANY offence, not just offences that constitute a prohibition; so even if the applicant is confident, or even actually knows it will not constitute a prohibition, the application requires its disclosure. That is, even if the charge is one for which the PR is fully confident it will not affect eligibility for citizenship, and in particular that it is not a charge which constitutes a prohibition (for most of the criminal related prohibitions, see Section 22 in the Citizenship Act, which is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-5.html#docCont ), even then the applicant is asked to disclose it.
1 .My question is can I still apply for citizenship in Canada?
The answer to this question is not easy. And there are collateral questions, which likewise are not easy to answer.
My impression is that this offence would be, or at least could be construed to be, an "indictable" offence under Canadian law, and thus constitute a prohibition. Which is to say that if the charge is still in any way pending you are not eligible for a grant of citizenship, or if there is a conviction, you will not be eligible for citizenship for a period of four years following the date of the conviction.
I am not at all sure of this. You can apply, disclose the charge, and IRCC will determine if it constitutes a prohibition; worst case (as long as you disclose it and do not make misrepresentations about this) is the application is denied. Before deciding whether to apply you can consult with experienced lawyers to get their opinion (noting it will be their opinion, which is usually but unfortunately not always reliable).
Being prohibited from a grant of citizenship for four years based on this probably seems rather harsh. And, indeed, IRCC might treat this more like a provincial driving infraction than recognizing it to be an indictable offence constituting a four year prohibition. I DO NOT KNOW how IRCC approaches these kinds of charges.
The CAUTION, in contrast, is that not only might this charge be "indictable," under the Canadian Criminal Code, if it is considered to be the equivalent of the offence prescribed by Section 320.18(1) in the Canadian Criminal Code (see https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-44.html#docCont ), that is also an offence which if prosecuted by indictment is a conviction for which the individual is "liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years," as prescribed in Section 320.19(5) of the Criminal Code. That meets the definition of "serious criminality" rendering a PR inadmissible, subject to having PR status terminated.
The latter seems rather unlikely. And my guess (emphasis on *guess*) is that it is unlikely. But I do not really know the scope of CBSA and IRCC screening of PRs for these kinds of criminal charges, or the particulars in how certain foreign charges are categorized relative to Canadian crimes. But it demands paying some attention. Approaching the situation with some caution.
Long way around to suggesting it is probably a good idea to see at least an immigration lawyer.
Longer Explanation (or why it would be a good idea to at least consult with a Canadian immigration lawyer):
Assuming you are asking whether you are eligible for a grant of Canadian citizenship despite the charge in the U.S., that is a complicated question which I cannot answer for sure. In particular, I do not know how this or that driving related offence in other countries, such as the U.S., fits into Canada's "Offences Relating to Conveyances."
The key is whether or not IRCC will consider this charge to be an indictable offence in Canada.
As I noted, my impression is the charge would be an "indictable" offence under Canadian law, since on its face it seems there is a significant prospect this charge falls under Section 320.18(1) in the Canadian Criminal Code (see https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-44.html#docCont ), which is what is called a "hybrid offence" in Canada, meaning it can be prosecuted either as an offence punishable by indictment or on summary conviction.
Here's the rub: Under Canadian immigration law for purposes of what constitutes "serious criminality" (for which a PR can be determined to be inadmissible, leading to loss of PR status), "an offence that may be prosecuted either summarily or by way of indictment is deemed to be an indictable offence, even if it has been prosecuted summarily." This is section 36(3)(a) IRPA, see here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-2.5/page-6.html#docCont
There are scores and scores of what in the particular case, based on the facts and circumstances of the case, are fairly minor criminal transgressions, "offences," defined as hybrid offences in Canadian criminal law, but not only typically prosecuted in Canada as a summary offence but usually resulting in minimal penalties, such as a modest fine and no jail, often not even any probation. Some driving offences can be and might typically be prosecuted provincially, and it is my impression this may be true even if a charge under the federal Criminal Code could be laid.
Remarkably, some of these offences are not only punishable by indictment, but can result in imprisonment for up to ten years. And the offence defined by Section 320.18(1) is such an offence. That meets the definition of "serious criminality" constituting grounds for finding a PR inadmissible and subject to loss of PR status and deportation . . . even if the facts of the case itself indicate a minor offence and the actual outcome of the criminal case is a summary conviction and no more than a modest fine. Yeah, severe, potentially remarkably harsh.
It seems, emphasis on how things appear, however, that such action against PRs for these kinds of offences is rarely if hardly ever seen. So the practical probabilities suggest no need to worry. Probably. Again, I do not know for sure.
For Reference Regarding Prohibitions and Ineligibility for a Grant of Citizenship:
For purposes of applying for citizenship, in particular, the question is whether the charge constitutes a prohibition. Again, this is mostly set out in Section 22 in the Citizenship Act, which again is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-5.html#docCont
The pertinent subsections are 22(1)(b.1) and 22(3).
22(1)(b.1) is essentially about charges outside Canada which are in any way still pending; if a pending charge "would constitute an indictable offence" in Canada, it constitutes a prohibition.
22(3) is about convictions for charges outside Canada; if the conviction is for a charge that "would constitute an indictable offence" in Canada, it constitutes a prohibition.
What matters is whether the offence is considered to be an indictable offence if it occurred in Canada. Its classification in another jurisdiction, like the U.S., is mostly not relevant. In particular, the fact that it is a misdemeanor in the state where this happened, and regardless of the minimal penalty that can be imposed, does not determine what the equivalent charge is in Canada. The corresponding Canadian criminal offence is determined by the particular elements of the crime. What this means, unfortunately, is that what is classified as a minor offense in the U.S. is often nonetheless an indictable offence under Canadian law, recognizing that under Canadian law despite the crime being an indictable offence, absent aggravating circumstances it is typically prosecuted summarily resulting in a rather minimal penalty.
