A consular officer mistakenly believed that an applicant had spent eight months in the United States, and denied the applicant under 214(b) for residing in the US. In fact, the applicant had only spent four months in the US and after we presented evidence confirming this, she was issued a visa.
Notwithstanding the growing liberalization of laws relating to the recreational use and possession of certain drugs, the Immigration and Nationality Act provides little solace for those who have been convicted of or admit to committing a
The list of controlled substances can be found at this link. This inadmissibility provision does not consider whether the person participated knowingly in the
Similarly, an expungement of a
Because of the grave consequences, it is absolutely imperative to seek out immigration legal assistance when presented with charges for a controlled
Once this relief is granted, for example, in the form of a dismissal of cause nolle prosequi, then the decision of the consular officer can be challenged. We are one of the relatively few firms with successful experience in obtaining a writ of coram nobis and subsequently having a bar under 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) rescinded.
As one can see, this is a very complicated area of the law with potentially very dire results. Because it is a complicated area, consular officers may make a mistake in incorrectly applying it. There is particular hope for a nonimmigrant visa applicants with this problem: more than 40% of them who have been subjected to this bar receive nonimmigrant waivers or successfully challenge the decisions. Please contact us to find out how we can help you.