Originally Posted by
mistakesmade
Hey! Sorry for the late reply.
I did as you recommended and I was able to visit in person and get it extended by the clerk there by 30 days.
But I didn't need the extra time as I was able to acquire the documents in 2 weeks when I told the Court Records Clerk that it was for a Nexus Application.
Fast forward to yesterday, I dropped off my documents. And this afternoon, I found out that I was denied due to my previous fraud convictions
and will require a US Waiver to get in.
" inadmissible to the US per INA 212(A)(2)(A)(i)(I). Therefore, you are required to obtain an immigration waiver to enter the US. "
I wonder if I would have been able to enter the US without a waiver if I didn't go through with the Nexus application.. but then again you mentioned that the US and Canada share the same database
Sorry to hear about the outcome. If travel to the U.S. is important to you, you should strongly consider hiring an attorney who specializes in U.S. immigration law and admissibility of aliens.
There are conflicting (non-binding) decisions by appellate panels in another unit of DHS, the USCIS, as to whether a Canadian conviction for fraud is a "crime involving moral turpitude."
Compare
this:
The applicant is a native and citizen of Canada who was found to be inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. s 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), for having been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. ...
On February 22,2000 the applicant received seven convictions for Fraud under the Criminal Code of Canada for which she received one sentence of two years probation. ...
All of the applicant's convictions for Fraud were under section 380.(1)(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada. ... The AAO observes there is no intent element under this section of the statute. ...
As the Canadian statute under which the applicant was convicted does not have an intent element, the AAO finds that her convictions for Fraud do not constitute crimes involving moral turpitude.
with
this:
The applicant is a native and citizen of Canada who was found to be inadmissible to the United States pursuant to section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. s 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) ...
On January 26, 1995 in Canada the applicant was convicted of Fraud over $1000 under section 380(1)(A) of the Canadian Criminal Code ...
With respect to the applicant's 1995 fraud conviction, any crime involving fraud is almost always a crime of moral turpitude. ... The AAO therefore finds that the applicant has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.
and
this:
The applicant is a 36-year-old native and citizen of Canada. The record reflects that she was convicted of fraud in Canada in 1997. On the basis of this conviction, the applicant was found to be inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. s 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), for having been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. ...
The record contains the applicant's record of conviction, indicating that she was found guilty of Fraud contrary to section 380(1) of the Canadian Criminal Code in 1997. The AAO finds that the applicant's conviction renders her inadmissible as an alien convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. The AAO thus affirms the director's finding that the applicant is inadmissible as charged under section 212(a)(2)(A) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. s 1182(a)(2)(A).
Importantly, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings recently about how it should be decided whether a particular crime is a "crime involving moral turpitude" and those decisions "overrule a lot of past precedent, to the benefit of immigrants."
(Here are some practice alerts/advisories to point your attorney to on the topic:
ILRC,
IDP,
EOIR.)
Also, there are also two key exceptions to the 'crimes involving moral turpitude' inadmissibility grounds, the 'minor's exception' and the 'petty offense exception', which are found in INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii) -- also known as
U.S. Code, title 8, section 1182(a)(2)(A)(ii).
So, your age at the time, and possibly also whether you were subject to summary conviction or indictment (for an example of summary conviction falling into the petty offense exception, see this
2016 CBP - ARO letter), may play a role in the exceptions. All of this may also play a role even if you seek a waiver.
Only a competent lawyer experienced in these areas will be able to sit down with you, gather the needed information, and figure out what to do next given your specific situation. Because everything above is just general background information and not legal advice, you'll need to contact a lawyer if you want actual legal advice. By contacting state and county bar association referral hotlines in the U.S. state most convenient to you, consulting immigration law associations, and thorough Internet searching, you should be able to find someone appropriate for you.