I ask because I had a similar circumstance where I have a 3 year old DUI, however, in the state of Illinois a first offense is typically supervision as long as you follow through with what the judge orders (fines, classes, and community service usually). Now, on my record it shows the arrest but does not show a conviction.

I was actually approved by the Canadian side for NEXUS because I was never actually convicted. If there is not a conviction on your record this may be a route to go for you to avoid any future hassles.

Townshend - interesting. In AZ they can pursue 'DUI - Impaired to the Slightest Degree', which basically means jail for a first offense of driving sober. Someone busted for walking with car keys at a .05 BAC in AZ would have a jail record, while someone driving over .08 from another state would show not much of anything, record-wise.

I assume this is where the TRP comes in to play, where each case can be judged on the individual merits. The problem is the required lead-time makes it a non-starter for most business travel. Maybe the solution to this whole mess is a streamlined online application process that takes days, not months.

The cops see you walk out of a bar. You're clearly drunk. They watch you get in your car, and turn on the ignition. The throw the car in drive, slam your foot down on the gas, shoot forward and a half a block later you mow down a pedestrian or t-bone a car. The cops then arrest you.

That was the old method. The problem is, citizens had an issue with the whole "why did you let a drunk guy drive and mow down the pedestrian/t-bone a car". I admit, it can be a tough one, and truthfully, it's more bad luck than anything else to get arrested before you're driving. But, it's also foolish to let someone get behind the wheel and try and drive when they're falling down drunk.

How often did the pedestrian get hit in half a block, though?

The reason for the rule was the cop finds the guy sleeping it off beside the highway and it's obvious that he drove drunk but he's not driving now.

There's also the issue of the cop having to wait for you to actually do something before arresting you. Keys + car + drunk = DUI makes life simpler for them. That doesn't mean it's justice.

As far as I'm concerned the cop should watch and nail you if you move the car.

The whole 'actual physical control' thing came in to play decades ago when a guy was found asleep in his pickup truck with engine running at an intersection. He apparently stopped at a red light and passed out. Common sense law. The problem is that prosecutors started stretching the definition and the whole thing was left up to precedent.

For a while case law supported the idea that someone 'sleeping it off' was safe from prosecution, but recent precedents have upheld convictions of folks just using car AC to get out of heat.

The law, in AZ at least, has been tweaked to make the jury the final decider in these cases - only the jury can decide what 'actual physical control' means in each case. So, while the cops can arrest someone using the 'key FOB' trick, it doesn't mean a jury has to agree that equates to 'driving.' That's why a DUI arrest typically comes with a laundry list of other charges that can be dropped to get the big money plea.

Do you have a bumper sticker on your car that says "Bad cop, no donut"? :eek:


It's not court histories, rather the NCIC database.


Same here, and I've been to Canada about half a dozen times this year alone.

I decided to look into this further. Sorry, MrEcks, I didn't find anything definitive. Do we have any Canadian attorneys on FT?

There appears to be a method for automatic rehabilitation, without any additional filing/process: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...bilitation.asp

Of course, it says that if you aren't certain you meet the conditions you should apply. But US citizens can not apply at the normal visa offices, but can do so at the port of entry: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...itation.asp#a2

But then it states that if you aren't sure, you should apply normally... which as a US citizen it says you can't do. So I'm clearly missing something obvious here.

But see here, which implies you are "deemed rehabilitated" after ten years http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...OC.asp#5312E5:

Note the documentation required:

And see this reg:

As this subject gets more publicity it will resolve itself. Notice how MADD doesn't advertise stories of people getting DUIs while sitting at Thanksgiving dinner when there are cars in the driveway. Same with business travelers getting bounced because of a 20 year old college prank.

As I said earlier - if that's the policy, then own it. I want to see a Superbowl Commercial sponsored by the Canadian Government, addressed to the US business traveler enumerating all of the nonsense reasons people WILL get detained and denied. If you don't want us there then shout it out loud.

Ha ha ha Canadians being loud and proud of our policies. You don't know us very well (unless you want to talk about universal healthcare) :)

To be fair, the US isn't always really welcoming for business reasons for Canadians either. More than once I have been quite extensively questioned (with Nexus/Global Entry by the way) about the purpose of my business trip when all I was doing was attending a couple meetings at a sister company. I also know someone who had a VERY valid work visa application (TN app) in a specialized field and was desperately needed there but was turned away twice by the CBP (until he crossed at an airport instead of a land crossing).

DUI isn't nonsense. Yours likely is by the sound of it (I will assume you are telling the truth, but you must admit that's a lot to ask of a border guard), but lots of people die every year due to drunk driving that don't need to. That the law in your particular jurisdiction is stupid (and I must agree it really is) isn't the Canadian government's fault (it's actually your governments); they shouldn't really arbitrarily apply the law. Should the law change - well now there's a good question . . . . should common sense prevail? Of course it should. But will it?

Further, should the US deny Canadians entry for a pot conviction (which they routinely do)?

We are all making a mistake I'm personally finding myself becoming more aware of - that common sense should prevail. In fact in general that seems to be more of an exception than a rule.

I am not a Canadian attorney, but I am a US attorney who lives on the Canadian border. Last year I brought over a friend who was a Canadian immigration to teach a seminar on admissibility in Canada and took a two day Canadian immigration class in Toronto geared for US attorneys who had to know something Canadian immigration law (e.g. Canadian Immigration for Dummies).

Americans can usually apply for a temporary residence permit (formerly a Minister's permit) at the POE, but they can also apply at the Consultate for their region. The problem is that Consulate is often backed up. A temporary residence permit is for someone not eligible for rehabilitation, but who has a good reason to visit or transit through Canada. A TRP doesn't confer a right to remain, but it is generally good for a year and is renewable.

Whether the ten year automatic rehabilitation provisions apply depend on whether you were convicted of an offense carrying ordinary criminality or serious criminality under the Canadian Immigrant and Refugee Protection Act (Article 36). It is serious criminality if the Canadian equivalent of your offense carried ten years or more incarceration. If it did, you need to go through manual rehabilitation. If it carried less than ten years, you can be automatically rehabilitated.

Canada respects US set aside orders, e.g. rehabilitative expungments. If the foreign rehabilative test is similar to Canada's and doesn't fail "puke test," Canada will respect it. The case creating the puke test (Sanai v Minister) to set the tone involved a guy convicted of blowing up an Air India jet, killing hundreds of people, and then getting a Pakistani pardon for it.

The US, conversely, doesn't honor foreign pardons or set asides. While it is some evidence of rehabilitation, it is not binding. Exception: A Canadian with a criminal record, a Canadian pardon, and an I-194 waiver from the US can apply for a Nexus card.

1. The underlying facts and circumstances of a conviction aren't reflected in what court records>NCIC>Canadian authorities see. All they see is the fact of the conviction. And that's the way it ought to be.

2. The US is no more welcoming (and in some was much less welcoming) of people with similar types of convictions from abroad than Canada is of US convictions.

3. The key here is that if you do have a conviction and you might ever want to travel, start the process now not later.

Which person was it that got a pardon from the Pakistani government for blowing up an Air India jet and killing hundreds of people on it? I sort of remember some of the details about AI 182, but don't recall when Pakistan pardoned a convicted AI bomber of bombing an AI flight.

http://expressindia.indianexpress.co...hp?newsid=4103

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parminder_Singh_Saini

http://www.mississauga.com/news-stor...rted-to-india/

I think this is the case referenced. Hijacking outside of Canada, with a questionable pardon in Pakistan, vs the bombing which killed Canadian citizens.

Dubai Stu - do you have any sense of the odds of getting a TRP at port of entry in a case like mine? My manager actually wants to fly in together so he can plead my case (that has 'Laurel and Hardy' written all over it - we'll both end up in chains...) My feeling at this point is still to pursue the process through consulate to be ready for next year, but if the odds are 50/50 it doesn't seem worth it.

astak/Often1 - I'm not singling out Canada by any means. I'd love to see a Fiesta Bowl ad featuring some of the folks busted for 'not driving while sober.' Instead the only commercial I see is the one where a guy gets stopped at a check point and 100 gallons of scotch pours out of the driver side window.

Your odds at a POE of getting a TRP for a drunk driving is very high. I recommend calling the CBSA post ahead of time and scheduling an appointment if they will do it. Tell them that you want to avoid the peak crossing times. When you pull up to the border post, tell the person there that you have an appointment with the supervisor. They will automatically divert you to secondary inspection. Note: you should assume your car will be searched. Search it yourself (even if it is a rental) the night before.

Make a xerox copy of all the documents you plan to bring and FedEx it to the POE three days before your scheduled appointment. Tell them that you will have the originals with you, but this is so they can do any advance research that they want to do.

It is the case and I think the facts in that case are rather extreme. In my opinion, Canada is very good about excepting most criminal set-asides. I wish I could say the same about the US. We honor Canadian pardons/record suspensions for entry into the Nexus program, but still require you to complete I-194 waivers based on the same former conviction.

For US immigration purposes, the only pardons that count are from the President of the United States or the governor. It would be interesting to see what they do with a Georgia pardon which is issued by the Pardon Board rather than the Governor.

The place where some jurisdictions "split the baby" is automatic set asides similar to the UK's "spent conviction" scheme. Cases involving individualized determinations are normally more likely to be accepted (if the border authority sees the conviction at all).

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but is it different flying vs driving in? I flew in and had no problem, had a DUI 3.5 years ago.

No, no different. But as with anything that falls in a grey area, it always depends on the agent you see and whether it shows up in their records (obviously what they see when they scan your passport is a little bit secret). Depending on what kind of DUI and the circumstances in the state you were convicted it may or may not matter or even be available to the CBSA.

Usually not a problem
 

Hello everyone
I had a DUI in 2005 and was extremely worried about entering Canada in 2014. I looked at all the online information, and it seems as though most of the negative information could be traced back to people who used or were working with lawyers.
Nevertheless, I had NO problems getting in by air. None. The new immigration/custom form says NOTHING about criminal history. Only if you get a question then you will have to answer HONESTLY. The Canadian Border website says that people with only 1 DUI and nothing else will probably have no issues.
I stressed about this for MONTHS, and finally figured .... So - don't believe all that you read. If you have had only ONE DUI and it has been at least 5 years, then I believe you have no issues.

After reading this thread, I felt the urge to register and add some accurate info about entering Canada with a DUI because much of what is written here is totally incorrect.

First of all, if you have a DUI (misdemeanor or felony) in the past 10 years you may be inadmissible to Canada. This does NOT mean that you WILL be denied entry to Canada, it simply means that it COULD happen! There are several factors that can affect whether or not Canada Immigration will let you in - everything from the officers mood to whether or not your DUI involved an accident causing property damage or personal injury. Don't fool yourself however, when you arrive at the border and hand over your passport they can immediately see everything about you (unlike 5 years ago when Canada & USA only shared limited criminal databases). If your DUI happened more than 10 years ago and you don't have any other criminal history, you will be "deemed rehabilitated" and can enter Canada no problem. If you show up at the Canadian border with a single DUI that didn't involve an accident, have no other strikes on your criminal record, and have a valid reason for entering Canada (a bachelor party doesn't count) - not only will you likely be allowed in, you could even be eligible for OB 389 which means you don't have to pay the $200 government fee for a TRP.

If your DUI was >5 years ago, you can apply for Criminal Rehabilitation which wipes the slate completely and is a permanent solution (you'll never have to worry about entering Canada again). Here are the documents required for Rehabilitation:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/kit...s/IMM5507E.PDF

If your DUI was <5 years ago, you can apply for a Temporary Resident Perment (TRP) which is a bandaid solution that allows you to temporarily enter Canada. Here are the documents required for a TRP:
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/kit...s/IMM5557E.PDF

You don't need a lawyer to apply for either of these two things, and can technically apply for both at a Canadian consulate, visa office, or even the border. However, the amount of tedious documents required can be overwhelming - so applying in advance is beneficial since forgetting a single document could mean game over if you're at the border. People hire a lawyer to ensure that the application is complete (aka they have all the correct documents, etc.) as well as to word the application correctly (a lawyer can often making your application so strong you can get a multi-entry TRP good for several years which is huge if you're likely to go back to Canada again down the road). Again, you DO NOT need a lawyer, but if you want to maximize your chance of success (aka you're traveling for business or something crucial) they really do help.

Ken Smith

Flying to Canada with dwi
 

Hello folks

I hope I've found the right place for this!

I will be traveling to Canada (Toronto) in a few short weeks. Based on my research it seems that they have a tendency to deny entry from alcohol related offense. I received a dwi charge exactly 5 years ago and I was disposed this coming June five years prior.

I plan on brining my disposal with me, also I attended a non court ordered AA class. Which I received a letter of completion from, I will also be brining this as well.

I plan on being honest with them 100% as I have no reason not to. I have never left the country before either. I'm just curious to see based on past experiences what are my chances of being accepted? What are standard questions to be asked by customs? Anything else I should bring?

Thank you guys for any info, it is greatly appreciate it!

Canadians take alcohol related offenses very seriously and do turn around those who have been convicted of DUI/DWI/OVI. CBSA (Canadian immigration) has access to US criminal records so they can pull up your criminal record right at the border. Canada equates foreign convictions to Canadian law and DWI is a felony in Canada, so it is grounds for inadmissibility.

You might be able to get a Temporary Residence Permit, but you need to show why you need to come to Canada. The cost is C$200 and is only good to enter Canada once and to stay as long as the immigration officer deems is sufficient.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...ty/permits.asp

Before heading to Canada, you should go to the closest Canadian embassy to ask if you'd be admissible to Canada.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...TOC.asp#5312E3

http://www.phillipsonlundin.com/prac...da-with-a-dui/

A fellow who worked for the company long ago went into
Canada with a DWI on his record.

He was given a thorough screening, questioning and had
to strip down to his underwear... but eventually was allowed
into the country.

https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/det...h-dui-offenses

Thank you both for the information!

http://www.startribune.com/sports/ou...140403093.html

Any truth to this?

Yes, but the problem is, most people who get denied entry aren't even aware of the issue. Also, if you get denied at all, frequently it's after previous trips to Canada with no issues. It works both ways - a Canadian guy I work with was turned away at YYZ a few years ago for a drug conviction in Canada when he was a teenager - in the 1970s. He had entered the US well over 100 times since then, and it wasn't an issue until someone merged a database or something in 2012.

I used to travel with a sales guy - American - who had multiple DUIs in the US. We went to Canada at least a dozen times together, for work, and he had a lot of other trips solo. He continued with a few trips per for for another dozen years. Last year, he was denied entry at YUL because of his DUI. The last DUI was in 1992, and he gets denied in 2013. After dozens of entries into Canada.

Got through border-no sweat
 

I just went through YYZ Toronto airport. I had a dui conviction 4 years ago and they did not even stop me or question me. They just asked me why I was there. I went for a work conference. less than 1 minute transaction. the canadian border patrol are very friendly and professional. dont sweat it just say a prayer and be completely honest.

You could go 100 more times to Canada and never get denied. Or, you could be denied on your next trip. That's the problem with the system. You never know where or when.

Just wanted to give any one interested or may read this in the future an update.

I was successfully allowed into Canada. Walked into customs, lady scanned my passport, asked me a few questions, stamped my passport and was on my way.

Was never asked if I was arrested before. This may come up in the future obviously. I was concerned when my passport was scanned as I figured my arrest record would pop up. But either it did and she didn't care or it's just for more serious offenses.

Will be traveling back in a few weeks so will see what happens then!

They don't ask you if you've been arrested unless they know you have.

They don't need to ask anything, it's to determine whether you are telling the truth.

The bottom line here is that anecdotes don't help. You can be admitted 100 times and denied on your 101st or denied your first time.

Sorry to ressurect this but I'm planning a trip to Winnipeg for a week during the World Cup and just learned of the restrictions. Happened summer 2011, nothing else on record, no injuries/damage, no jail time.


Has anyone gone through the process of the TRP and can provide some direction here? the CiC and the consulate sites and a continual loop of confusion. The inadmissible page says a TRP may be obtained to gain legal admission. When you click the link the page provides it says visa-exempt countries may have their own form. It says otherwise submit a temporary resident visa application. USA is exempt but I can't find anything definitive on the LA/NY sites that says if there is or is not our own form. So then there is the temporary resident visa. But I thought I needed a permit, not a visa? Why do the seem interchangable, even on the same CiC page?

Once its known what forms/checklist i Actually need to follow, which office is it sent to?

this is a lawyer's website but has some good basic info.
 

http://www.temporaryresidentpermitcanada.com/

The document you need, IMM5708 has to be downloaded then opened with Adobe Reader.

Thanks, though I looked at that form and the field for current country of residence is Canada. Looks like this form is only for those already there.

the form itself states it's to be used for an initial visa
 

I understand it says "Canada" but it also states it's for an initial visa as well

So after a lot of headaches, I've only recently discovered that the IMM 5708 is in fact only for those already in Canada. the forms title is to be read as "Remain in Canada as[:] a Visitor or [as a] Temporary Resident Permit Holder [while already here].

US citizens apply for a TRP through the LA consulate and use a different form that the consulate uses instead of the TRV (temporary resident Visa) that gets referenced for those countries that are Visa exempt like the USA is.

IM 1444 is the one the LA consulate accepts (I have verified this with the consulate) http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/informa...ns/rehabil.asp

Need to fill out these forms as complete as possible given the circumstance. It's the form for being declared rehabbed but, as stated in the form's instruction guide, for those needing a TRP (since it's been less than 5 years required for other inadmissible remedies) they check the box at the top stating "for information only".

Complete as much as possible apparently means you don't need to have the FBI check and whatnot that would obviously be for proof of rehab. Basically you need to show is your reason, your funding for the trip, that your leaving after, and that what makes you inadmissible doesn't show a risk to Canadians if they let you in.

Providing photocopies of court papers showing charge/conviction, no jail time/injury/accident, tickets, travel and lodging reservations, bank statement and pay stub, and passport (including blank pages as outlined) should suffice for the immigration officer reviewing. Since I went to Germany for the 06 WC I'm also going to provide copies of documentation and passport stamps showing that trip as well to show the reason is not out of the ordinary.

According to a response I received from the LA consulate, the average time for a TRP processing is 2-3 weeks.

I think it's worth trying since it can mean a guarantee of entry ahead of getting to the border but from some reading it seems those with inadmissibility for a DUI with nothing else, that have solid documentation, will almost certainly get a TRP at the border.

FYI.. not sure if it's mentioned but TRP's CA$200 fee is now being waived for the first application. As part of an explanatory letter with my application, I am submitting a bank check but then requesting the waiving of the fee for completeness sake (in the event the waiving of the fee is not a guarantee). Applicants for any immigration service are refunded if they somehow overpay.

Same Boat
 

SnakeEyes: I'm in the same boat - traveling to Canada for the WC and planned the trip before my DUI incident. Found out about being inadmissible just about a month ago and have been scrambling to find a way in. I do not have enough time to mail in my application for a TRP and am thinking about attempting it at the border. Only difference is my DUI involved an accident (no injuries, no other car involved, only my car).

I've been waiting to attend a WC for years and I really hope I have a chance. No priors and I have more than sufficient documentation with my application.

Looks like after getting everything together, right forms, and sent off that it may have bee too late and I may be applying at the border now. I'll let you know how it goes.

LetMeInCanada, when are you planning on going up?

I've done several of these for people over the years, but refer most of them to a Canadian colleague. Canadian law says that you can only represent someone if you don't charge (assuming you are not a Canadian lawyer, paralegal, or certified immigration consultant). I practice on the US side of the border and when I do one, I make people write me a check to my favorite charity.

What I normally do (and this matches what Canadian immigration attorneys do -- I've seen at least dozen TRP packets that were attorney prepared over the years).

I draft a cover letter covering all the basis, compelling issues for entry, and introducing the person. I complete loosely the documents on the Rehabilitation checklist.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/kit...s/IMM5507E.pdf

I use the rehabilitation form checked "for information only." I do not do fingerprinting or provide a photograph. The CBSA at the port of entry will do that.

I include the US statute under which the person was convicted and its Canadian counterpart. Canada uses a duck test to figure out what is the closest statute and legal judgment can help here. If there is a Canadian statute which carries under ten years (not serious criminality) which fits the pattern I argue why that is the approrpriate statute. (Where this is in play, really think about a lawyer). It is much easier to get a waiver with ordinary criminality and much harder with serious criminality.

I look for evidence of a substance abuse problem. If the crimes are recent or the person has a history which suggests it, I send them for a substance abuse evaluation and include it in the packet.

I include the case documents -- the police report, the judgment of sentence, order completing probation, etc. I get certified where possible. If it isn't, I verify the documents with the court and prepare an affidavit as an a US attorney that they are true and accurate copies.

If the person has done things to demonstrate rehabilitation, I include them. I also include counseling certificates or letters from their counselors.

I include three well drafted reference letters from people who understand the nature of the person's conviction and can offer meaningful assurances why they aren't likely to be a risk.

If the person is entering Canada for a business purpose, I deal with that issue at the same time. I document their NAFTA status, why they are a business visitor, and if a work permit needs to be purchased why they don't need a labor market opinion.

If the person is entering Canada for personal purposes, I address the nature of the visit, include letters from whom they are staying and at least try to explain why it is a compelling purpose. In my opinion, while the statute requires a compelling purpose, this requirement is not always consistently applied.

The typical packet has tabs till about F. It is a fair amount of work. Don't start on it at the last minute. When you are done, have someone who is whose personality would be close to a border guard carefully scrutinize it and tell you what they see wrong. Make it clear that you don't want them to sugar coat it.

Curious how this turned out? I just got a DWI but trial isn't until November. I'm supposed to travel to Toronto in late October for work.