Possible denial of PR status due to criminal record

[tamhiker]

Hello All:
I'm a 63 old American married to a Canadian from Montreal. I've applied for Permanent Resident status (had sponsorship accepted by Quebec) - recently received email from CIC saying they're considering denying my application because of my criminal record. I was arrested & convicted of shoplifting ($4 bottle of laundry soap) & 2nd offense interfering with a police officer - for refusing to leave an anti War demonstration. Both occurred in 1971 within several months of each other.
Otherwise - spotless record - successful, long career in teaching - now semi-retired.
They've given me 60 days to submit any exculpatory documentation, or whatever I have that could sway them in my favor.
I'm citing the CIC regulation that states "criminal rehabilitation" is deemed to apply if it's been more than 10 years - or - the offenses would've meant less than 10 years in jail if done here. Both situations apply in my case.
I'm also submitting character references, and a letter of appeal pointing out the above - and going on to recount by 43 year spotless history since that time.
Does anyone have any further suggestions - or comments about this scenario? Am I missing something?

 

[taffy7]

I have no advice i'm sorry i just think this is absolutely ridiculous .Any chance you can get the court records? Did you write an explanation when you sent in your application form or are they going for misrepresentation.

 

[Ponga]

I think it's fair to say that you are in all likely hood `deemed' rehabilitated, but...did you disclose that you were in fact arrested in your application? If you did NOT, that could be the real issue here: misrepresentation. Something as minor as this (from my side of the screen) that occurred 40+ years ago could easily slip back into the mental archives of just about anyone!

If I recall, the language doesn't even ask if you've been arrested...only if you've been charged and convicted.

I think you might want to at least call a lawyer (most offer a complimentary consultation).

Best of luck!

 

[bartjones]

I think the problem you have is that you have two convictions, one of which, namely the offence of interfering with a police officer, is a hybrid offence in Canada (see s. 129 Criminal Code of Canada) and therefore considered indictable for the purposes of the Immigration Act. In those circumstances (i.e two convictions, one summary, one indictable) I believe the deemed rehabilitation provisions won't apply to you. Regulation 18(2)(b) states;

18(2) The following persons are members of the class of persons deemed to have been rehabilitated:

(b) persons convicted outside Canada of two or more offences that, if committed in Canada, would constitute summary conviction offences under any Act of Parliament, if all of the following conditions apply, namely,

(i) at least five years have elapsed since the day after the completion of the imposed sentences,

(ii) the person has not been convicted in Canada of an indictable offence under an Act of Parliament,

(iii) the person has not within the last five years been convicted in Canada of an offence under an Act of Parliament, other than an offence designated as a contravention under the Contraventions Act or an offence under the Youth Criminal Justice Act,

(iv) the person has not within the last five years been convicted outside Canada of an offence that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an offence under an Act of Parliament, other than an offence designated as a contravention under the Contraventions Act or an offence under the Youth Criminal Justice Act,

(v) the person has not before the last five years been convicted in Canada of more than one summary conviction offence under an Act of Parliament, other than an offence designated as a contravention under the Contraventions Act or an offence under the Youth Criminal Justice Act,

(vi) the person has not been convicted of an offence referred to in paragraph 36(2)(b) of the Act that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an indictable offence, and

(vii) the person has not committed an act described in paragraph 36(2)(c) of the Act;

In your case you have two convictions outside of Canada but one is considered indictable. Having said that, you may still be eligible to apply for rehabilitation. I just don't know.

I agree with the other poster that the situation is a little ridiculous. They're both minor offences that happened eons ago. Notwithstanding the silliness of it all, you have a very serious problem. Criminal inadmissibility is a complicated legal issue that may well be fatal to your application. I'm with Ponga. You would be well advised to consult an immigration lawyer immediately. Best of luck.

 

[zardoz]

Are CIC claiming that you may be "inadmissible" or that you may be committing "misrepresentation"? It seems very odd that they would focus on such historic events.

What was the exact wording in the email?

 

[scylla]

I think the problem you have is that you have two convictions, one of which, namely the offence of interfering with a police officer, is a hybrid offence in Canada (see s. 129 Criminal Code of Canada) and therefore considered indictable for the purposes of the Immigration Act. In those circumstances (i.e two convictions, one summary, one indictable) I believe the deemed rehabilitation provisions won't apply to you. Regulation 18(2)(b) states;

This. I think you may not be "deemed rehabilitated" because you have two convictions and have to actually apply for rehabilitation before you can qualify to apply for PR. Probably a good time to speak with an immigration lawyer. Good luck - agree it's silly.

 

[Hasan9999]

This. I think you may not be "deemed rehabilitated" because you have two convictions and have to actually apply for rehabilitation before you can qualify to apply for PR. Probably a good time to speak with an immigration lawyer. Good luck - agree it's silly.

In case of misrepresentation here, what would happen?

 

[scylla]

In case of misrepresentation here, what would happen?

Findings of misrepresentation typically result in the application being refused and the applicant being issued a 2 year ban from entering Canada.

 

[Hasan9999]

Findings of misrepresentation typically result in the application being refused and the applicant being issued a 2 year ban from entering Canada.

Thank you for the answer.

 

[Mrs.Purcy]

Apply for rehabilitation and you should be ok

 

[scylla]

Apply for rehabilitation and you should be ok

I agree. I think this is the right thing to do.

 

[tamhiker]

Thank you all.
BTW - Yes - I did report these arrests in my initial application of April 2013. They were on my FBI background check. CIC just notified me 3 weeks ago that they're considering denial.

I will talk to lawyer - although I've been waiting two weeks now for one of the three I contacted to return my call. I'll keep trying.

Ultimately, I will probably just go ahead and appeal directly to the case officer to accept my application on the basis of my character references and history since 1971.

I have decided to not go through the alternative "Criminal Rehabilitation" application process - which costs $1000 - and is a very invasive investigation into every single thing I've done, where I've lived, worked, etc. over a 43 year period. The money is not the issue - the principle is. I simply cannot bring myself, after a 40 year career as a respected teacher and writer, to subject myself to a process called "criminal rehabilitation" over something so petty, and so long ago. I just cannot allow my own internal sense of self-worth to be impacted, at this stage of my life, by such a degrading experience. If my direct appeal fails - then so be it. But principles do matter - to me.

Anyway - thank you all so much for your thoughts and comments of support.

 

[bartjones]

Thank you all.
BTW - Yes - I did report these arrests in my initial application of April 2013. They were on my FBI background check. CIC just notified me 3 weeks ago that they're considering denial.

I will talk to lawyer - although I've been waiting two weeks now for one of the three I contacted to return my call. I'll keep trying.

Ultimately, I will probably just go ahead and appeal directly to the case officer to accept my application on the basis of my character references and history since 1971.

I have decided to not go through the alternative "Criminal Rehabilitation" application process - which costs $1000 - and is a very invasive investigation into every single thing I've done, where I've lived, worked, etc. over a 43 year period. The money is not the issue - the principle is. I simply cannot bring myself, after a 40 year career as a respected teacher and writer, to subject myself to a process called "criminal rehabilitation" over something so petty, and so long ago. I just cannot allow my own internal sense of self-worth to be impacted, at this stage of my life, by such a degrading experience. If my direct appeal fails - then so be it. But principles do matter - to me.

Anyway - thank you all so much for your thoughts and comments of support.

It's your decision but in the absence of an application for criminal rehabilitation your PR application will almost certainly be denied. Like it or not, the Immigration Act is very clear. Criminal convictions render you inadmissible to Canada for any visa other than a temporary resident permit. Your only chance would be to submit an argument on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and hope the VO feels badly for you. I wouldn't bet the farm on that approach succeeding.

I'm not sure about the fees you've quoted. My wife's criminal rehabilitation application cost $200 though she only had a single offence.

Can I ask this; where are you living at the moment, the US or Canada? I ask because if you are in the US and close to a border crossing, you can submit a criminal rehabilitation application at a port of entry where they are usually processed much faster.