cole trickle

I had great help on the canadian part of this forum so i thought i'd try the US side!
I was convicted for criminal damage in 1988 and was fined £150, i travelled to the usa in 2000 and as i had been arrested i applied for and got a 10 year tourist visa.
I intend to travel to the usa again soon but have read on this site that criminal damage is not a crime involving moral turptitude.
So the question is should i apply for an esta or bite the bullet and apply for another visa?
Thanks,any help is gratefully accepted!

materialcontroller

Give the ESTA a try.

Noorah101

So when you applied for the tourist visa back in 2000, did you at that time think the crime was a CIMT? And that's why you applied for the visa?

If the crime truly is not a CIMT, then you don't need a visa. Just make sure (from a legal standpoint) whether the crime is or is not a CIMT (don't take a laymen's word for it on this forum).

Rene

cole trickle

When i applied for the tourist visa in 2000 i thought you had to have a visa if you had ever been arrested,its only after glancing at this site that i discovered the whole moral turptitude situation.

materialcontroller

The fact that OP has already been granted a 10 year B2 strongly suggests that his offence isn't viewed as CIMT. But for the avoidance of doubt, the official guidance from the FAM is here:

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86942.pdf

cole trickle

Reading through the attatched us embassy notes i think criminal damage of property is not a cimt,think i'll give an esta a try and see how i get on,thanks for the advice.

unic

I have recently been issued a 10 yr ME visa with a non CMT conviction.
At the interview I asked whether I would need another visa when this one runs out and was told I would

md95065

Which doesn't mean anything for the OP because:

1. every case is different
2. the information that you were given may or may not be correct and, in any case, only pertains to your specific situation

GeoffM

3. Ten years later it could all be different.

unic

Please accept my apologies. I was labouring under the dual misconceptions that

1. This is a discussion forum
2. Recent experience of a similar situation may be of help.

Guess I'll crawl back under my stone

GeoffM

Trouble is, in this kind of situation, every case does have the potential to vary by a huge amount. Useful to have another statistic though, even if it's hard to compare.

md95065

Yes, it is a discussion forum which means that you must expect people to comment on the things that you post.

I did not intend to suggest that you should not post about your own experience.

The problem, however, is that you really have no idea how similar or different your experience is to that of the OP and I was concerned that the OP who, like you, is very new to this forum might assume that what you were told would necessarily also apply to them.

unic

Seems to me the notion of 'once a visa, always a visa' might be a sensible option. Immigration are very likely to have records that previous travel was under a visa and I would imagine a VWP entry could be viewed with suspicion.
Hope OP comes back to us with ESTA result