ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 66

Thread: What constitutes "conviction in absentia"

  1. #1
    As per Wikipedia: Audi alteram partem (or audiatur et altera pars) is a Latin phrase that means, literally, hear the other side.[1] It is most often used to refer to the principle that no person should be condemned without a fair hearing in which the accused is given the opportunity to respond to the accusations against him.[2]

    "Audi alteram partem" is considered a principle of fundamental justice or equity in most legal systems. The principle includes the right of the accused or his lawyers to confront the witnesses against him, and to challenge the evidence presented by the state or prosecution in the process of establishing guilt or culpability.

    As per the above, it seems pretty simple. I have not been heard - I have never seen a judge - have never presented my side. This THING, in fact, has been eluduing me for 25 years. If proof to that eluding fact can be presented wouldn't that make it a clear cut case?

    I can't find any precedence, so the question remains...what constitutes "conviction in absentia"?
    “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

  2. #2
    As per Wikipedia: Audi alteram partem (or audiatur et altera pars) is a Latin phrase that means, literally, hear the other side.[1] It is most often used to refer to the principle that no person should be condemned without a fair hearing in which the accused is given the opportunity to respond to the accusations against him.[2]

    "Audi alteram partem" is considered a principle of fundamental justice or equity in most legal systems. The principle includes the right of the accused or his lawyers to confront the witnesses against him, and to challenge the evidence presented by the state or prosecution in the process of establishing guilt or culpability.

    As per the above, it seems pretty simple. I have not been heard - I have never seen a judge - have never presented my side. This THING, in fact, has been eluduing me for 25 years. If proof to that eluding fact can be presented wouldn't that make it a clear cut case?

    I can't find any precedence, so the question remains...what constitutes "conviction in absentia"?
    “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

  3. #3
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by davdah:
    No mystery here. Just what it says. Being convicted in absence. You were convicted. You were absent. I would imagine the details may include requirements to determine what constitutes being absent.

    A defense would probably be required to show it was not by their own intentional actions or overt negligence they were absent. The point being that such a conviction usually isn't valid without the person being tried having a voice in the matter.

    It would not include situations where there was representation. If a lawyer were assigned or retained and present this argument wouldn't apply.

    Another is if a person waived their right to face their accuser. This can happen if they walk out of the court room or gave written consent to waive their right of appearance. This waiving the right provision likely has the most expansive definition based on the various circumstances that could exist. For example. In a common scenario of a traffic violation where you run a red light, the camera takes your picture, and the municipality mails you a citation. No officer was present. No witnesses save the camera. You may not even be aware you were cited at the moment of the infraction. You moved and the address on file at the DMV is wrong and you never receive the citation. The conviction would stand since you had an obligation to report your address to the DMV when you move.

    I suspect being able to prove absence in the circumstance will determine the ultimate outcome. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You think this is absence?

    1983 Germany

    6/14 mandate issued
    6/20 delivered to wrong address – legal remedy gives 1 week (7 days) for response to charge (6/27 cut-off)
    6/27 find out about mandate
    6/27 write and date objection - mail to court
    6/29 court receives objection

    Silence – wait to hear from court re objection filed

    9/15 court dates rejection – reason non-compliance of time period
    9/20 court delivers rejection of first appeal
    9/28 mandate is executed and becomes final due to waiving of legal remedies.

    Pay the fine of DM 3000/$1200

    1984
    2/3 pay fine – talk to court administrator or public defender find out I can reinstate if incapacitation to file a timely appeal can be shown.
    2/5 retain lawyer – was under a doctor’s care from 6/6 – 7/7/83 (have proof).
    2/6 lawyer files reinstatement with doctor’s attestation

    Silence – wait for decision from court

    3/29 receive court’s decision of second rejection. Decision basically the same as the first one – non-compliance of time period. Although I was sick from 6/6 – 7/7/83 – the court decided I wasn’t incapacitated enough not to have filed a timely appeal.

    This is how I got convicted without ever seeing a judge.
    “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

  4. #4
    It happens with the USCIS (oh no, not them as well surely! ) You often see letters sent to the wrong address or late, well past the 30 day response period.
    "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

  5. #5
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by davdah:
    Based on this the best defense is the mandate was delivered to the wrong address to begin with through no fault of your own.

    They assumed, improperly, your address was other than what it is without verifying it. If the following are true. Your address was correct and on file with whom ever keeps track of those things. The mailer of the mandate is required to utilize due care in insuring citations are delivered to the correct address by using official address records to process mail. It was delivered to the wrong address. Only by mere coincidence did you discover it existed at all. I can't see how the conviction could be left to stand. This would be like the police dropping off speeding tickets at the local McDonalds and the judge agreeing that since you have eaten there in the past it constitutes being properly served. What if you go on a diet? Or, as is the case here, stopped visiting the person who resides at that address? What kind of idiots are running the courts over there? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You crack me up, Davdah, LOL! And Brit, I better not cite USCIS as yet another incompetant in front of their prosecutor. But, I can go with.... "what idiots are running the courts over there"....because I am over here! And, I do have the proof that it was delivered to the wrong address.

    I am curious what USCIS will do, i.e. their struggle to proof me wrong.
    “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

  6. #6
    Watch out now Davdah, you gonna end up like that guy on the beach

    Sorry Koller, couldn't resist to make comment
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    God Bless America - God Bless Immigrants - God Bless Poor Misguided Souls Too

    National Domestic Violence Hotline:
    1.800.799.SAFE (7233) 1.800.787.

  7. #7
    Davdah caught speeding in his new found love of the mini
    (hope the McDs was good!)

    "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

  8. #8
    Uh oh..not a 2002 C320? A friend has one and it's had so many problems. That was a bad year for Mercs and the C range in general:

    ConsumerAffairs.com
    "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by davdah:
    The best thing to do is anticipate what their argument is going to be and have the rebuttal ready for it.

    If I were in their shoes I'd argue that as far as the deliverer of mandates was concerned it was the correct address. The only basis would be you and your personal affects being there. Not much else could be said.

    Your response should be your registered address at the time along with any official documentation supporting it. Most important, what the requirements are for the agency responsible in delivering mandates to the proper address. There must be some procedure in place with written requirements. Find that, their violation of it, and it should be a done deal.

    Just got back from McDonalds a few minutes ago. So much for the diet. But at least I didn't pick up any speeding tickets while I was there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Davdah, you diet? What does this diet consist off? Do you like Apples?
    “...I may condemn what you say, but I will give my life for that you may say it”! - Voltaire

  10. #10
    An Apple a day keeps the doctor away! .
    ghvbbbnbn bvbvcfgxcc bvvcvb c !! LOL. B.S.!!!

    Unless You Share It With That tasty, Soft, delicious hunny With whipped cream and The favorable toppings!

    P.S. And the prenup!!!LOLOL!
    USC and Legal, Honest Immigrant Alike Must Fight Against Those That Deceive and Disrupt A Place Of Desirability! All Are Victims of Fraud, Both USC and Honest Immigrant Alike! The bad can and does make it more difficult for the good! Be careful who y

Similar Threads

  1. Motion to reopen for in absentia question?
    By cookies in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-26-2010, 01:53 PM
  2. criminal conviction
    By hope77 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-09-2007, 12:49 PM
  3. deportation in absentia
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-09-2003, 12:43 AM
  4. Mohan,"WHAT CONSTITUTES GREAT HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS?"
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-11-2003, 04:07 PM
  5. Conviction
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-28-2002, 04:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: