Going for a civil compromise of misdeameanor a better option than a pre trail diversion programme in a shoplifting case theft 3

If a civil compromise is available, it is probably better for you. If granted, it results in an immediate dismissal. Pre trial diversion means a (sometimes) lengthy continuance, and stipulations by you that could be damaging to other matters. Further, if for some unanticipated reason the diversion doesn't get completed successfully, you should expect to be convicted, just as though you had plead guilty. A civil compromise eliminates that risk. You should speak to an attorney who specializes in immigration, if that is a concern.

You have to be very careful about this, read all paperwork, and consult a lawyer. If in the compromise of misdemeanor paperwork, you are admitting to the facts underlying the theft, you may still be subject to immigration consequences.

INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(l) - the relevant statute - provides that an alien may be inadmissable if the alien has been convicted of, or admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime) - which includes theft.

So you don't want to take any resolution wherein you even admit having committed the acts underlying the crime, and sometimes compromise of misdemeanor paperwork includes that language, as does the diversion route. Consult an attorney, but probably your best bet will be to execute a carefully worded compromise of misdemeanor.

This answer is not legal advice and is for general informational and/or educational purposes only. No attorney-client relationship is formed between you and Sean B. Malcolm, an attorney licensed in Washington. For more information, see the Avvo.com terms and conditions of use, which are incorporated by reference herein.