the stressful "Decision cannot yet be made about your application"

[Stevo1979 71]

21 hours ago, Villanelle said:

You will most likely be denied. You should reapply after 5yrs has passed from the date of the incident or rather the end of diversion program / date nole pros was recorded.

 

Domestic violence is a serious matter. Of course reckless driving is also serious but you cant compare apples to oranges. 

The bolded is uncalled for. This is the second time you are making 'sure banker" comments that ended up being wrong.

Let us be careful how we say these spurious things

[Stevo1979 71]

17 hours ago, afrocraft said:

Hold up. Why are most people so negative about the prospect of approval in this case? 

Crime of moral turpitude? With no conviction?

Here's how the USCIS Policy Manual defines a conviction:

C. Definition of Conviction

1. Statutory Definition of Conviction for Immigration Purposes

Most of the criminal offenses that preclude a finding of GMC require a conviction for the disqualifying offense or arrest. A “conviction” for immigration purposes means a formal judgment of guilt entered by the court. A conviction for immigration purposes also exists in cases where the adjudication of guilt is withheld if the following conditions are met:

• A judge or jury has found the alien guilty or the alien entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or has admitted sufficient facts to warrant a finding of guilt; and

• The judge has ordered some form of punishment, penalty, or imposed a restraint on the alien’s liberty.

It is not always clear if the outcome of the arrest resulted in a conviction. Various states have provisions for diminishing the effects of a conviction. In some states, adjudication may be deferred upon a finding or confession of guilt. Some states have a pretrial diversion program whereby the case is removed from the normal criminal proceedings. This way the person may enter into a counseling or treatment program and potentially avoid criminal prosecution.

 

If the accused is directed to attend a pre-trial diversion or intervention program, where no admission or finding of guilt is required, the order may not count as a conviction for immigration purposes. 

makes more sense.

 

[Stevo1979 71]

4 hours ago, afrocraft said:

We should be really careful about judging a case without knowing the facts. By definition, couples are frequently in personal contact, and whether "grabbing" someone's arm is illegal depends a whole lot on the facts and their history. Women do it to their male partners, too, but we don't often consider that DV, do we? Let's be careful here. 

Makes even more sense

[Paatay Khan 16]

3 hours ago, JFH said:

 

Holding your partner's hand/wrist/arm and leg is DV. If you sneeze in front of her is DV. If you cough in front of her is DV. If you pick your nose in front of her is DV. If you yell at her is DV, disagreeing with her is DV. Did I miss anything? Because anything could make your partner uncomfortable.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Paatay Khan

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

Some of the increasingly dismissive responses here make it plain why US consulates around the world have signs up informing women of their rights in the US.

 

i will never forget a forum post I read once, a person newly immigrated giving advice to his fellow countrymen (I’m not going to name the country because I am sure not all men from this country are like this). One of the things he told people was (I’m paraphrasing) “you can’t just hit your wife here, you will get into trouble for it”. Yes, not everyone immediatelay understands what is considered acceptable here. I presume this is partly why people like the OP have to undergo training.

 

 

 

[Villanelle 4,122]

5 hours ago, Stevo1979 said:

The bolded is uncalled for. This is the second time you are making 'sure banker" comments that ended up being wrong.

Let us be careful how we say these spurious things

Most likely means more likely then not. Not sure why you would interpret it as 'sure banker'? I can only assume something Ive posted somewhere rubbed you the wrong way and you now feel the need to follow me and post comments like this. If you feel my comments are spurious or bad intentioned then please- report me to the mods.

[afrocraft 313]

22 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

Some of the increasingly dismissive responses here make it plain why US consulates around the world have signs up informing women of their rights in the US.... Yes, not everyone immediatelay understands what is considered acceptable here. I presume this is partly why people like the OP have to undergo training.

Sigh. I grew up outside the US. I still recall pleading with my mom to abandon her marriage, plotting one day to do untold harm to her abuser. Without getting into my personal story, I don't need to be told what domestic violence is, and what harm it does to partners, to children. I experienced it firsthand: the physical aspects, the emotional. I don't dismiss it; I abhor it.

 

But we don't really know what happened here. The circumstances matter when it comes to DV. And some of the naive suggestions here -- that merely making your partner "uncomfortable" or "yelling" at him/her is akin to DV -- make light of true abuse. Like the one that shaped much of my childhood. 

 

Anyway, this is an immigration forum. As I articulated earlier, USCIS policy favors approval of OP's case.

Edited September 27, 2019 by afrocraft

[Villanelle 4,122]

Anyway this thread is getting off topic. While it is interesting to see the various views on DV people may have its not relevant to the OP post.

 

From my observations almost every person who has DV issues in the n400 process gets denied. USCIS takes a very firm and not at all friendly approach to DV matters. As posted a conviction is not necessarily needed. The only good thing in this for the OP is that because there was no conviction if his n400 is denied he will not be subject to deportation for the DV matter. 

 

Since we do not have a transcript of the interview we have to go on what has been posted. (keeping in mind USCIS has the police report and court paperwork. And both the Officers on the scene as well as the prosecutor felt what occurred met the standards for the charges brought forth. The court also did not dismiss the case for no merits and the OP did complete a diversion program_). All of that combined with the OP explaining 'his side' can add up to a denial. 

 

What stands out to me is in the original posting he stated- then he asked about N-400 and then  about my Arrest ! I explained him FROM MY SIDE what had happened that night and I Said BUT the Case was Dropped and dismissed but He smiled and said IT WAS NOT DROPPED , it was NOLE PROS (no prosecution).  IMO what the Officer was stressing is what has already been pointed out- a conviction is not needed. If the crime occurred that is enough regardless of whether it was prosecuted. It would be helpful for the OP to keep this in mind and review what was actually said in the interview. If his focus was more like- yeah this happened but I was NOT CONVICTED. Well the emphasis should be on the 'this happened' part and not the no conviction part. 

 

Also it is a huge red flag for me that he describes the Officer as "nice". In all honesty the nicer they are the more likely it is they are going to deny you. They also never ever tell anyone they are denied in person at the interview. So when someone has an issue and then reports back the interviewer was super nice but the decision could not be made card is played it always makes me cringe a bit. When someone is denied their first instinct is to usually blame the interviewer but when they are 'nice' you cant really do that or claim they were biased against you. 

 

Hopefully the OP explained it in a way that satisfied the Officer that no crime did occur and is approved. 

[afrocraft 313]

14 minutes ago, Villanelle said:

From my observations almost every person who has DV issues in the n400 process gets denied. USCIS takes a very firm and not at all friendly approach to DV matters. As posted a conviction is not necessarily needed. The only good thing in this for the OP is that because there was no conviction if his n400 is denied he will not be subject to deportation for the DV matter. 

A USCIS officer cannot deny the application just because s/he does not like the applicant. There has to be legal grounds for denial. Not only that, the officer must articulate the reason(s) for denial in writing:

 

 

Quote

 

The written denial notice should include:

• A clear and concise statement of the facts in support of the decision;

• Citation of the specific eligibility requirements the applicant failed to demonstrate; and

• Information on how the applicant may request a hearing on the denial.

We underestimate how hard denials are. What would be the reason for the denial here?

[Villanelle 4,122]

What Is an Admission?
As mentioned above, for aliens subject to the grounds of inadmissibility or who are
required to establish good moral character, immigration consequences also may attach if
they admit to committing certain offenses for which they were not convicted. Specifically, an applicant for admission who:
is convicted of;
admits having committed; or

admits committing acts that constitute the essential elements of
either:
– a CMT or
– a controlled substance violation
is inadmissible. Similarly, an applicant for naturalization is precluded from establishing
good moral character if he or she has been convicted of or admits having committed certain crimes during the relevant statutory period. INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i). INA §101(f)((3). 

 

 The following is an example regarding cocaine but one can assume the questioning to be similar :

First, the alien should be thoroughly questioned to determine if he has committed a crime. Where available, arrest records will provide the officer a starting point to initiate questioning.Questioning should always be in a confident presumptive manner. For example, an officer encounters an alien with an arrest for cocaine possession but no conviction. He should not ask: “Have you ever knowingly possessed a controlled substance?” Rather, he should assert: I see you’ve been involved with cocaine. Are you still dealing drugs?” When confronted with the very serious offense of trafficking in cocaine, many criminal drug users will immediately deny this offense while equivocating on the lesser offense of cocaine possession. Experience indicates that if this individual actually was involved with cocaine, they will likely admit to it if questioned properly.
However, the officer must be very cognizant that the criminal alien might later assert he was improperly coerced into making damning admissions. Therefore, the officer should carefully document every circumstance surrounding the interrogation Thereafter, the officer obtains admissions of criminal wrongdoing from the alien (in the  alien’s language). Such an interrogation might go as follows:
Q. A few minutes ago
you told me that
you tried cocaine
here in the United
States. Did you in
fact tell me that?
A. Yes
Q. In order to possess
that cocaine you had
to actually have it in
your possession,
correct?
A. Yes
Q. This wasn’t an
accident, you knew you had
cocaine in your possession, correct?

A. Yes Q. Do you understand that Title 21 of the United States Code at section 844 makes it unlawful to knowingly possess a controlled substance?

A. Yes

 

The alien may likely have a further explanation, such as the use was long ago, he’s learned his lesson, etc. It is best to include every bit of this explanation in the written statement. This will help rebut any future claim from the alien that he was confused or that he did not mean he actually possessed cocaine.

 

 

Again not knowing exactly what was said in the interview and there a high chance in giving his 'side of the story' he may have admitted guilt especially because he was so sure that not having a conviction was the important part to focus on. Officers are trained how to ask questions. He is also in FL it seems where :

 

Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Diversion Program

 

Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Diversion is designed for those offenders who wish to participate in a program aimed at reversing the cycle of domestic violence and keeping the family unit intact.  This program requires the offender to complete a 26 week Batterer’s Intervention Program, as well as a substance abuse evaluation and/or other recommended treatment if deemed necessary.    The defendant must enter a guilty plea to the charges in order to participate in this eight month program.  If the defendant successfully completes the program, the plea will be vacated and the case will be nolle prossed (dropped).  This will allow the offender to then apply to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in a separate proceeding to seal or expunge their criminal record if otherwise legally eligible.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Villanelle
formatting

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

1 hour ago, afrocraft said:

Sigh. I grew up outside the US. I still recall pleading with my mom to abandon her marriage, plotting one day to do untold harm to her abuser. Without getting into my personal story, I don't need to be told what domestic violence is, and what harm it does to partners, to children. I experienced it firsthand: the physical aspects, the emotional. I don't dismiss it; I abhor it.

 

But we don't really know what happened here. The circumstances matter when it comes to DV. And some of the naive suggestions here -- that merely making your partner "uncomfortable" or "yelling" at him/her is akin to DV -- make light of true abuse. Like the one that shaped much of my childhood. 

 

Anyway, this is an immigration forum. As I articulated earlier, USCIS policy favors approval of OP's case.

Why did you assume my comment was aimed at you?

 

anwyay, yes this is off topic,  my original post was on topic: which is that I have seen a few other posters under the same impression that nolles pros was fine, then get denied. I have also seen reports of successful appeals of this. It’s not a slam dunk either way.

Edited September 27, 2019 by SusieQQQ

[Going through 5,669]

If the OP does end up getting denied...it's likely due to not meeting the GMC requirement, as I mentioned before, rather than the charges ending in a nolle pros result itself.

 

The problem is that with meeting the GMC it's also dependent on how the IO wants to swing---there's wiggle room to go either way.  Hopefully OP will report back as to what the end result was.

[Miamidade 6]

2 minutes ago, Going through said:

Hopefully OP will report back as to what the end result was.

I will. Still waiting for the answer. P.S I think it was a bad idea to apply for N400 with a Lawyer. He said that I shouldn’t worry because there is nothing to worry ( no conviction  . But I really appreciate that all people from this forum is helping me with advises as well.  

[Going through 5,669]

1 minute ago, Miamidade said:

I will. Still waiting for the answer. P.S I think it was a bad idea to apply for N400 with a Lawyer. He said that I shouldn’t worry because there is nothing to worry ( no conviction  . But I really appreciate that all people from this forum is helping me with advises as well.  

Just curious---is the lawyer you consulted a criminal lawyer or an immigration lawyer?

Edited September 27, 2019 by Going through

[Miamidade 6]

1 hour ago, Going through said:

an immigration lawyer?

Immigration. I had a Criminal lawyer when DV had happened. So Criminal Lawyer was working with State Attorney and its funny but they were both trying to help me with NO Immigration matter( because DV is Deportable) and then he offered me this program which in my County (miami -Dade) doesnt count as a Conviction. (In different counties if you sign this program its automatically Conviction but not in my place) then i've called immigration lawyer and he gave me approval about this program. After that i applied for  citizenship (both they told me that  its fine- you are good to go with this)