felony

[NickD 202]

Open a hotmail, yahoo, gmail account, use some bogus handle, come here, register, post something to get a rise out of people then leave.

Has that ever happened on any board before? Not saying that fla2008, a newbie is one of those, could be a 12 year old kid, bored laughing his head off while the rest of us get concerned making suckers out of the rest of us.

P. S. Didn't find that goat funny, old old bit of name calling, but should use a flea instead that likewise infers an infinitesimal sized male anatomical part with a more poetic sound to it when used in conjunction with the second word. Whatever that second word meant.

[Peter 0]

Hope that bag was worth it, idiot.

[sara..... 371]

you know i come from a large family i have one brother that turned to drugs........so if this idiot was caught with a BAG of cocaine i can say honestly he didn't just make a mistake

he has a large problem.........and with that problem comes a lot of other problems such as how he treats his wife and kids and who is he selling to so that he can keep his expensive habit or who is he stealing from to keep his expensive habit? How many times does he beat his wife and so on.......drug addicts are not kind people they don't just make mistakes the tear families apart the destroy anything that touches them that is good...... because of my brother our family has heard every excuse that can be offered for using drugs so i have no pity for him at all.............either this person is a very stupid one just trying to get people in an out roar or thinks everyone that comes here has the extent of usage problem that he does and could get good advice on this forum what ever the reason i really wish that this person was blocked and not able to post here again

[diadromous mermaid 36]

A. Deportability for Controlled Substance Offenses

A noncitizen convicted of an offense relating to a controlled substance is deportable and subject to removal from the United States. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B), INA § 237(a)(2)(B).

B. Specific Controlled Substance Offenses and Deportability

A conviction for a conspiracy or an attempt to possess, distribute, or manufacture a controlled substance is a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i). In the Ninth Circuit, a conviction for solicitation to possess a controlled substance is not a deportable offense under the controlled substance ground of deportability. Coronado?Durazo v. INS, 123 F.3d 1322 (9th Cir. 1997) (drawing negative implication from the statutory language that includes “attempts or conspiracies”).

1. Any record of conviction that does not identify the drug cannot support an order of deportability. Matter of Paulus, 11 I&N Dec. 274 (BIA 1965).

2. A conviction for a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is not a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

3. See Section V below for a discussion of the aggravated felony ground for drug trafficking offenses.

C. Effect of Rehabilitative Disposition

A dismissal or expungement under the Federal First Offender Act is not a conviction for “any purpose whatsoever.” 18 U.S.C. § 3607. The BIA treats as a conviction for immigration purposes a disposition under a state counterpart to the Federal First Offender Act. Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).

[califa 0]

i saw something like that ,a friend of mine had a gram of coca and the immigration did not take his greencard and gave him a 10 y one.why? because one gram of coca is a low level of felony and he made a drug program and he did not have jail time or nothing like that.i know it's a felony, but it's a very small crime and for the first time everyone gets a second chance...good luck to him or her.

Edited June 18, 2008 by califa

[Muergana 0]

With the help of good lawyers you might be able to make it through the green card process but I would advise to probably never apply for citizenship.

I think we are being too hard on this guy. We have all done things we are not proud of. I was addicted to cigarettes for a few years, chemical addictions are powerful things and for someone who does not know what an addiction is it can be hard to understand. All we are doing to this person is alienating him when we should be encouraging him to get help or seek a different type of lifestyle.

i saw something like that ,a friend of mine had a gram of coca and the immigration did not take his greencard and gave him a 10 y one.why? because one gram of coca is a low level of felony and he made a drug program and he did not have jail time or nothing like that.i know it's a felony, but it's a very small crime and for the first time everyone gets a second chance...good luck to him or her.

[James 2]

2. A conviction for a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is not a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

Actually, the statute says that a conviction for 30 grams or less of marijuana is the only one relating to controlled substances that does not render an alien deportable.

So the bottom line is that if the OP is convicted, he's gone. However, there are drug court and other diversion programs here in South Florida. First time offenders often get a withhold of adjudication, which could save him. All of which his lawyers ostensibly know, which in turn begs the question why this guy is trolling here soliciting responses from distinctly non-qualified people to questions that only immigration and/or criminal defense attorneys are qualified to answer.

To wit:

The BIA treats as a conviction for immigration purposes a disposition under a state counterpart to the Federal First Offender Act. Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).

The Ninth Circuit reversed Roldan in 2000. Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728, 750 (9th Cir. 2000). The AG's office subsequently issued an advisory opinion interpreting the statute to mean that an alien with an expunged conviction not involving a simple first-time possession of narcotics remains convicted and thus removable. (Of course, that interpretation is not binding on Article III courts.)

[NavarreMan 10]

FFS, people. He did the crime and he's gonna do the time. Why does everyone feel the need to show how "honorable" they are?

Phonies.

Jenn,

You know most of us better than that. He got spanked because several people gave good advice and he shat on them. Since then it has been all downhill. He will get the same treatment that a seated President gets for a BJ and a politician gets for shaking his foot under a bathroom stall. He was in a position that required good judgment and moral turpitude and he blew it. It was not a mistake but a conscience effort that got him in his current situation. He should know better than to do the coke and he should know better than to come here with this story looking for sympathy. Were it me I would confide only to my lawyers and not air my dirty laundry here.

[NavarreMan 10]

2. A conviction for a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is not a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

Actually, the statute says that a conviction for 30 grams or less of marijuana is the only one relating to controlled substances that does not render an alien deportable.

So the bottom line is that if the OP is convicted, he's gone. However, there are drug court and other diversion programs here in South Florida. First time offenders often get a withhold of adjudication, which could save him. All of which his lawyers ostensibly know, which in turn begs the question why this guy is trolling here soliciting responses from distinctly non-qualified people to questions that only immigration and/or criminal defense attorneys are qualified to answer.

To wit:

The BIA treats as a conviction for immigration purposes a disposition under a state counterpart to the Federal First Offender Act. Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).

The Ninth Circuit reversed Roldan in 2000. Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728, 750 (9th Cir. 2000). The AG's office subsequently issued an advisory opinion interpreting the statute to mean that an alien with an expunged conviction not involving a simple first-time possession of narcotics remains convicted and thus removable. (Of course, that interpretation is not binding on Article III courts.)

He asked what he should do. The advice he got from the start was almost exclusively "get a lawyer". It does not take a rocket scientist to be qualified to give that advice.

[Gallowglass 0]

Everyone who keeps making obvious statements to the effect of, "drugs are bad". Gallowglass's post was particularly notable.

Good. If you noticed it, then maybe the OP will too.

Everyone seems to know that drugs are "bad". Yeah, everyone apart from the OP, it seems.

You get caught with a bag of coke, you do the time and take the consequences. In other words, you don't put yourself in a position where you get caught with drugs in the first place. You made a promise when you got your visa that you'd behave yourself, or suffer the consequences. The specific circumstances surrounding the OP's case are now a matter for the criminal courts - not this forum. and this is the wrong bloody place to be looking for sympathy.

USCIS and the USA owe each and every one of us absolutely NOTHING, people.

Zip.

Nada.

Sweet FA.

Folks would want to start getting that into their heads right now. We're all ultimately starting on a path to citizenship here. That entitles us to all manner of good things - but also presents us with obligations and duties. One of those duties is NOT TO BREAK THE BLOODY LAW!! Our new home has laws and they are to be respected, adhered to and obeyed - no more, no less. If part of those laws mean that they can run you out of the place if you commit a felony while adjusting status....well, "if you can't do the time, don't etc."

My point? If the OP wants to get himself messed up with this sort of #######, it shows zero care or anything else for all those here who are playing by the rules and waiting on the other side of the world from loved ones. The OP has diverted the attention and resources of a number of State and/or Federal agencies to deal with HIM, because he's made himself a problem. Those resources are therefore not focused on the rest of us and we have to wait that little bit longer. It is these incremental increases, mounting statistics, crime analysis building into types and/or the number of offences committed by people in his situation, by people from wherever he comes from that slow our processing times even further.

Think about that for all those who didn't get a touch today or yesterday.

Could it possibly be because someone at UCIS was just about to deal with your file when the phone rang and it was a police officer looking for details on the OP's immigration status? How many more calls like that were made yesterday? and how many more of us will go yet another 24 hours with nothing but silence from USCIS?

The bottom line is that we have an individual who entered the US legally, but who has subsequently apparently committed a felony. Enough like him, and that will cause a serious problem for the rest of us. It's called reaching a tipping point. If enough people who are in X situation subsequently do Y action (which is a crime), then policy shifts. There's a demand to stop Y from happening, and the source is looked at. If it appears that people from Z location are committing Y, then Z location gets a harder time.

Again, think about that for all those who didn't get a touch today or yesterday.

Suppose USCIS policy is now to be more careful/ more thorough/ go slower on applications from a particular country?

I've worked in government for long enough, dealing with exactly these kinds of issues to tell you that this is exactly how the world works. It affects us (in our unique situation here) far, far more than we'd imagine.

Remember. You are ambassadors for you country and for everybody else here, regardless of race, country of origin or religion. You are both morally and legally obliged to behave yourself in what you are going to call home.

So was I harsh to the OP? You bet. But he's in the wrong place if he's looking for sympathy.

[NavarreMan 10]

Everyone who keeps making obvious statements to the effect of, "drugs are bad". Gallowglass's post was particularly notable.

Good. If you noticed it, then maybe the OP will too.

Everyone seems to know that drugs are "bad". Yeah, everyone apart from the OP, it seems.

You get caught with a bag of coke, you do the time and take the consequences. In other words, you don't put yourself in a position where you get caught with drugs in the first place. You made a promise when you got your visa that you'd behave yourself, or suffer the consequences. The specific circumstances surrounding the OP's case are now a matter for the criminal courts - not this forum. and this is the wrong bloody place to be looking for sympathy.

USCIS and the USA owe each and every one of us absolutely NOTHING, people.

Zip.

Nada.

Sweet FA.

Folks would want to start getting that into their heads right now. We're all ultimately starting on a path to citizenship here. That entitles us to all manner of good things - but also presents us with obligations and duties. One of those duties is NOT TO BREAK THE BLOODY LAW!! Our new home has laws and they are to be respected, adhered to and obeyed - no more, no less. If part of those laws mean that they can run you out of the place if you commit a felony while adjusting status....well, "if you can't do the time, don't etc."

My point? If the OP wants to get himself messed up with this sort of #######, it shows zero care or anything else for all those here who are playing by the rules and waiting on the other side of the world from loved ones. The OP has diverted the attention and resources of a number of State and/or Federal agencies to deal with HIM, because he's made himself a problem. Those resources are therefore not focused on the rest of us and we have to wait that little bit longer. It is these incremental increases, mounting statistics, crime analysis building into types and/or the number of offences committed by people in his situation, by people from wherever he comes from that slow our processing times even further.

Think about that for all those who didn't get a touch today or yesterday.

Could it possibly be because someone at UCIS was just about to deal with your file when the phone rang and it was a police officer looking for details on the OP's immigration status? How many more calls like that were made yesterday? and how many more of us will go yet another 24 hours with nothing but silence from USCIS?

The bottom line is that we have an individual who entered the US legally, but who has subsequently apparently committed a felony. Enough like him, and that will cause a serious problem for the rest of us. It's called reaching a tipping point. If enough people who are in X situation subsequently do Y action (which is a crime), then policy shifts. There's a demand to stop Y from happening, and the source is looked at. If it appears that people from Z location are committing Y, then Z location gets a harder time.

Again, think about that for all those who didn't get a touch today or yesterday.

Suppose USCIS policy is now to be more careful/ more thorough/ go slower on applications from a particular country?

I've worked in government for long enough, dealing with exactly these kinds of issues to tell you that this is exactly how the world works. It affects us (in our unique situation here) far, far more than we'd imagine.

Remember. You are ambassadors for you country and for everybody else here, regardless of race, country of origin or religion. You are both morally and legally obliged to behave yourself in what you are going to call home.

So was I harsh to the OP? You bet. But he's in the wrong place if he's looking for sympathy.

Cheers

[James 2]

2. A conviction for a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is not a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

Actually, the statute says that a conviction for 30 grams or less of marijuana is the only one relating to controlled substances that does not render an alien deportable.

So the bottom line is that if the OP is convicted, he's gone. However, there are drug court and other diversion programs here in South Florida. First time offenders often get a withhold of adjudication, which could save him. All of which his lawyers ostensibly know, which in turn begs the question why this guy is trolling here soliciting responses from distinctly non-qualified people to questions that only immigration and/or criminal defense attorneys are qualified to answer.

To wit:

The BIA treats as a conviction for immigration purposes a disposition under a state counterpart to the Federal First Offender Act. Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).

The Ninth Circuit reversed Roldan in 2000. Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728, 750 (9th Cir. 2000). The AG's office subsequently issued an advisory opinion interpreting the statute to mean that an alien with an expunged conviction not involving a simple first-time possession of narcotics remains convicted and thus removable. (Of course, that interpretation is not binding on Article III courts.)

He asked what he should do. The advice he got from the start was almost exclusively "get a lawyer". It does not take a rocket scientist to be qualified to give that advice.

My post makes it eminently clear that I was not referring to the "get a lawyer" advice, which in any event was hardly the advice given "almost exclusively."

[Jenn! 918]

Sigh.

My point is to save the parenting for your children. But I guess some people are "just like that" I guess.

Preach away!

ETA: And FWIW I agree the OP is most likely a troll.

Edited June 18, 2008 by Jenn!

[NavarreMan 10]

2. A conviction for a single offense for simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is not a deportable offense. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

Actually, the statute says that a conviction for 30 grams or less of marijuana is the only one relating to controlled substances that does not render an alien deportable.

So the bottom line is that if the OP is convicted, he's gone. However, there are drug court and other diversion programs here in South Florida. First time offenders often get a withhold of adjudication, which could save him. All of which his lawyers ostensibly know, which in turn begs the question why this guy is trolling here soliciting responses from distinctly non-qualified people to questions that only immigration and/or criminal defense attorneys are qualified to answer.

To wit:

The BIA treats as a conviction for immigration purposes a disposition under a state counterpart to the Federal First Offender Act. Matter of Roldan, 22 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 1999).

The Ninth Circuit reversed Roldan in 2000. Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728, 750 (9th Cir. 2000). The AG's office subsequently issued an advisory opinion interpreting the statute to mean that an alien with an expunged conviction not involving a simple first-time possession of narcotics remains convicted and thus removable. (Of course, that interpretation is not binding on Article III courts.)

He asked what he should do. The advice he got from the start was almost exclusively "get a lawyer". It does not take a rocket scientist to be qualified to give that advice.

My post makes it eminently clear that I was not referring to the "get a lawyer" advice, which in any event was hardly the advice given "almost exclusively."

Let me re-phrase what I said: The advice up to the point where this turned nasty was almost exclusively helpful advice on retaining a lawyer. Soon after it became a free-for-all.

[NavarreMan 10]

Sigh.

My point is to save the parenting for your children. But I guess some people are "just like that" I guess.

Preach away!

ETA: And FWIW I agree the OP is most likely a troll.

Ya think?