unic

Many thanks for your responses to my previous post.
Conviction for obstructing a constable in 2006. Travelled to US on VWP in 2008 believing conviction was not CIMT.
Looking at US embassy site this time see that all convictions require a visa so apply.
Having looked at State Dept Foreign Affairs Manual (thanks material controller!) I am convinced conviction is not CIMT (max sentence one month, I got a fine).

At the interview if they see it as not CIMT what will they do? Ban me for wasting Embassy time? Give me a visa? Cancel and send me to VWP? Lock me up for not declaring conviction last time?

Should I consider using an immigration lawyer before the interview?

Thanks for your help

materialcontroller

The US Embassy website is misleading. The instructions there are intended as a CYA for the State Department.

I wouldn't bother wasting money on an immigration attorney. Just attend the interview and see what happens. You followed the (incomplete and incorrect) advice on the embassy website so go there with a clear conscience.

It's impossible to say what could happen as the outcome is very much dependent on the individual interpretation of the consular officer you get at interview. They won't ban you or lock you up (I guess those were tongue in cheek remarks anyway). The most likely outcomes are:

• Offence is deemed CIMT - Visa denied - Waiver not recommended
• Offence is deemed CIMT - Visa denied - Waiver recommended
• Offence is not deemed CIMT - Visa denied - You seek ESTA authorisation to use VWP
• Offence is not deemed CIMT - Visa granted

ian-mstm

The web site is wrong - and they are allowed to post incorrect information.


There are only two outcomes when you apply for a visa: approval or denial. Anything that is not an approval, is a denial. If the visa is denied for whatever reason, that denial must be declared on every subsequent visa application including ESTA. A denied visa will also result in a denied ESTA for at least 6 months or so.

If you've already scheduled an interview... well, it's too late to make any changes now. It's quite simple... if you don't get the visa, you won't be travelling to the US anytime soon.

Ian

unic

Many thanks for your prompt responses!

I appreciate your advice material controller, and won't bother with a lawyer.

Interesting what you say Ian about the website being wrong, I suspect I will not attempt to point that out to them at interview!

If the offence is deemed not to be CIMT (and I am finding more and more evidence to support that) it would seem that a logical outcome would be for them to grant me a 10 year multi entry visa!

I'll keep my fingers crossed for that.

materialcontroller

There is no reason to point out that their website is misleading but if (or rather when) you are asked why you're applying for a B2 instead of continuing to use the VWP, you can legitimately point out that you're following the embassy's own advice - which is that anyone who has ever been arrested should seek a visa.

The ten year multiple entry B2 is the best case scenario but please keep in mind that there may be other less favourable outcomes too. I wish you the very best of luck with your interview.

unic

Thanks mc.
Do you have a gut feeling in this case? You have more experience of this process than I do