IMMIGRATION CONSEQUENCES OF
CRIMINAL CONDUCT

Every year, thousands of immigrants, many of them long-time permanent residents, are placed under removal proceedings because of criminal offenses. Some of these offenses were minor and many may have been committed many years ago. However, there is no statute of limitations in removal proceedings. Many of these offenses are classified as “aggravated felonies” although they are neither “aggravated” nor are they “felonies”. Others are classified as “crimes of moral turpitude”. An example of this is a shoplifting conviction.

While a conviction may be expunged for many purposes, this does not wipe your record clean for immigration purposes.  Conduct which does not count as a conviction for criminal purposes may be still be considered as a conviction in Immigration Court.  Confusing?  Very!

We represent many foreign-born persons who the government is trying to deport for minor offenses which occurred years ago. For example, we are currently opposing the deportation of a Canadian man nearing retirement whose wife and two married daughters are U.S. citizens. His crime? He pled nolo contendre to a marijuana possession charge when he was a teenager!

The U.S. Supreme Court has recently held that it is the duty of criminal attorneys to advise immigrant defendants of the deportation consequences of pleading guilty or nolo contendre to a criminal offense. However, the complexity surrounding this issue is simply mind-boggling! Will you be subject to the “categorial” approach or the “modified categorial” approach? Would a particular conviction render you removable, inadmissible or both?

If this is confusing to you, it is all the more reason to hire an immigration attorney who is experienced in this area of law.

If you are an immigration attorney, or a person who may be subject to deportation, we hope that the resources listed below are helpful to you.

“I needed a super heavy weight immigration attorney because USCIS denied my naturalization application and started deportation procedures…Mr Shusterman and his team where able to reverse both immigration decisions and I am now a U.S. citizen…It takes a rare lawyer to be able to succeed in reversing BOTH such decisions. He saved my career and my family.” (More client reviews…)

• List of Crimes of Moral Turpitude (State Department)
• Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions – Office of Immigration Litigation (September 2010)
• Criminal and Deportation Defense – National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild
• Defending Immigrants
• Tooby’s Guide to Criminal Immigration Law (230 pages)
• Padilla Resources Page (American Bar Association)
• Judulang v. Holder US Supreme Court (12-12-11) – Green Card Holder Eligible to Apply for 212(c) Waiver Whether Conviction is for a Removable or Inadmissible Ground
• ICE Targets Fewer Criminals in Deportation Proceedings (11-05-11)
• Immigration Prosecutions for November 2010
• Immigration Convictions for November 2010
• Padilla v. Kentucky – US Supreme Court (3-31-10) – Duty of Counsel in Criminal Proceedings to Warn Client About Deportation Consequences of Plea
• Duty of Criminal Defense Counsel Representing An Immigrant Defendant After Padilla v. Kentucky (IDP Practice Advisory)
• Retroactive Applicability of Padilla v. Kentucky – National Lawyers Guild (6-24-10)
• AAO Decision Regarding Use of Marijuana (6-17-09)
• Nijhawan v. Holder – U.S. Supreme Court. 129 S. Ct. 2294 (6-15-09) – Whether a Particular Theft Crime is an Aggravated Felony
• Matter of Silva-Trevino, 24 I&N Dec. 687 (A.G. 2008) – Application of “Modified Category” Approach to Crimes of Moral Turpitude
• Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez U.S. Supreme Court (1-17-07) – A Theft Offense Includes the Crime of Aiding and Abetting a Theft Offense
• Lopez v. Gonzales – When is a Drug Offender an Aggravated Felon? – U.S. Supreme Court (12-06-06)
• Lopez v. Gonzales Practice Advisories and Media Materials (Immigrant Defense Project)
• Leocal v. Ashcroft – DUI Causing Bodily Harm is Not a Crime of Violence – U.S. Supreme Court (11-09-04)
• DOJ/EOIR Proposed Regulation Implements St. Cyr v. INS (8-13-02)
• EOIR FAQ: §212(c) Regulations (8-13-02)
• EOIR Fact Sheet: §212(c) Regulations (8-13-02)