Immigration Consequences of Guilty Plea in Criminal Proceedings in CT - Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-1j

Sec. 54-1j. Ascertainment that defendant understands possible immigration and naturalization consequences of guilty or nolo contendere plea. (a) The court shall not accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere from any defendant in any criminal proceeding unless the court first addresses the defendant personally and determines that the defendant fully understands that if the defendant is not a citizen of the United States, conviction of the offense for which the defendant has been charged may have the consequences of deportation or removal from the United States, exclusion from readmission to the United States or denial of naturalization, pursuant to the laws of the United States. If the defendant has not discussed these possible consequences with the defendant's attorney, the court shall permit the defendant to do so prior to accepting the defendant's plea.

(b) The defendant shall not be required at the time of the plea to disclose the defendant's legal status in the United States to the court.

(c) If the court fails to address the defendant personally and determine that the defendant fully understands the possible consequences of the defendant's plea, as required in subsection (a) of this section, and the defendant not later than three years after the acceptance of the plea shows that the defendant's plea and conviction may have one of the enumerated consequences, the court, on the defendant's motion, shall vacate the judgment, and permit the defendant to withdraw the plea of guilty or nolo contendere, and enter a plea of not guilty.

(P.A. 82-177; P.A. 97-256, S. 6; P.A. 03-81, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 97-256 amended Subsec. (c) by imposing a three-year time period after the acceptance of the plea for the defendant to show that his plea and conviction may have one of the enumerated consequences, and deleting provision that, in the absence of a record that the court provided the required advice, the defendant is presumed not to have received such advice; P.A. 03-81 amended Subsec. (a) to replace former provision prohibiting the court accepting plea unless the court "advises" the defendant of the possible immigration or naturalization consequences of conviction if the defendant is not a citizen and setting forth specific language of such advisement with provision that prohibits the court accepting plea unless the court first addresses the defendant personally and determines that the defendant fully understands such possible consequences, add "removal" from the United States as a possible consequence and add provision requiring the court to permit the defendant to discuss these possible consequences with the defendant's attorney prior to accepting plea, amended Subsec. (b) to make a technical change for purposes of gender neutrality and amended Subsec. (c) to make provisions applicable if court fails "to address the defendant personally and determine that the defendant fully understands the possible consequences of the defendant's plea, as required in subsection (a) of this section" rather than if court fails "to advise a defendant, as required in subsection (a) of this section" and make a technical change for purposes of gender neutrality.

Court found that the time limit for filing motion was procedural in nature and therefore could be applied retroactively. 251 C. 617. Warning of deportation and denial was substantial compliance with provisions of statute since defendant was warned guilty plea implicates immigration status. 257 C. 653.

Court need only inform defendant of potential deportation consequences rather than engaging defendant in a manner to ensure full understanding. 62 CA 805. Section is in place only to call defendant's attention to potential immigration consequences under federal law, not to inform defendant of every possible consequence of a plea. 68 CA 499.

My Spouse Left the US to Avoid Paying Child Support - International Enforcement of Child Support

Failure to pay court-ordered child support carries criminal consequences under both the state and federal statutes. In addition, non-paying parent may encounter severe immigration ramifications for avoiding payment of child support obligations.


July 14, 2009 – Currently every state has an in-state child support enforcement mechanisms that allow a state to garnish income, hold non-paying spouse in contempt or revoke his/her license. Income withholding encompasses deduction of money from the income of the non-custodial parent (including wages, overtime pay, worker's compensation, unemployment compensation, retirement benefits, etc.) A person found in contempt may be ordered to pay a lump sum of money. The person also can be sent to jail (incarcerated) until a certain sum of money is paid. Finally, if a court finds the non-custodial parent failed to obey the court order, it may order his or her driver's license, professional, occupational license, or recreational license suspended after 30 days.

If the non-custodial parent moves out of state and the state Support Enforcement Services Unit is already enforcing the case, the Unit will take the steps to collect child support from the out-of-state parent. Some of the available interstate enforcement tools include:

* Direct income withholding (the filing of an income withholding with an out-of-state employer)
* Registering a custodial parent order in a new state to give the new state authority to enforce the order
* Interstate real property liens
* Seizure of financial assets
* Referral to the U.S. Attorney for federal prosecution under the Child Support Recovery Act and Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 228.

However, there are circumstances when a non-custodial parent may attempt to leave the US in order to avoid payment of the child support. Luckily for a custodial parent, if a non-paying spouse left the US in hoping to avoid paying the child support, there might be a relief available. In 1996, the United States government joined international convention concerning enforcement of child support. If a non-paying spouse resides in a country where US has a bilateral agreement, the child support obligations are easier to enforce. At this moment, such countries are Australia, Canada. Czech Republic, El Salvador, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Switzerland, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

In addition, State of Connecticut signed separate child support agreements with the following countries: Australia, Bermuda, Canadian Provinces: Alberta, Nova Scotia, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick; Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico (the following 27 of 32 states): Aguascalientes, Nayarit, Baja California, Nuevo Leon, Campeche, Puebla, Chiapas, San Luis Potosi, Chihuahua, Queretaro, Coahuila, Quintana Roo, Colima, Sonora, Distrito Federal, Tabasco, Guanajuato, Tamaulipas, Guerrero, Tlaxcala, Hidalgo, Veracruz, Jalisco, Yucatan, Michoacan, Zacatecas, Morelos; Norway, Poland, Slovak Republic, United Kingdom: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland.

Immigration Consequences of Failure to Pay Child Support

A Legal Permanent Resident (green card holder), who is applying for the US citizenship must demonstrate good moral character. Fulfilling one's child support obligations is crucial to satisfy this requirement. Hence, failure to pay child support may prevent a non-paying non-US citizen parent from becoming a U.S. Citizen.
Changing country of residence may have dire immigration ramifications even on the U.S. Citizens. Although U.S. passports cannot be denied based on requests from private individuals, nonetheless the Secretary of State must deny issuance of a passport to a person who is in arrears of child support of more than $5,000 based upon a certification to that effect by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). (42 U.S.C. 652 (k)). Needless to say that the restoration of a U.S. passport or even obtaining the limited validity passport for the purpose of entering the U.S. is a complicated bureaucratic process.

Frequently, non-custodial parents fall behind their child support payments due to the change in their financial circumstances and assume that there is nothing can be done to fix the problem. They may decide to leave the country, work"under the table" to avoid have their wages garnished or undertake other ill-advised decisions. Fortunately, most of the child support issues could be avoided by a timely consultation with an attorney who has experience in child support modifications.

Alex Meyerovich - M.C. Law Group, LLP is an immigration lawyer in Bridgeport, Connecticut.

To learn more, visit http://www.uslegalvisa.com

The information presented is a general information only and should not be construed to be a formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. Contact an experienced licensed attorney to discuss circumstances of your case.

# # #

Full service immigration law firm handling cases in all areas of immigration law. Our attorneys also provide representation in the areas of family, criminal & business law with particular attention to the consequences on our clients' immigration status.