Probation act and travel implications.

Scally07

2 years ago I was arrested over a public order offence, brought to court and convicted, got a 200quid fine and the judge applied the probation act.

This summer i'm hopefully headed to the U.S for a 3 week holiday and i'm concerned my little brush with the law could spoil things.

From what I gather its not technically a conviction but will appear on your record. Hence getting the Benefit of the probation act.

I'm just looking to see if anyone else had any difficulty with it when taveling to the states or, could shed some light on whether or not it can have implications when travelling there.

congo_90

AFAIK and (i'm very much in the same boat as yourself...) the probation act means your record is clear. At least thats what the judge said to me once i donated a few bob to a charity of his choice. I could be wrong on this. Hopefully not though.

Scally07

Just rang the embassy call centre there(2.40 per min, nice:rolleyes:), their advice was to fill out some form or another, contact them again and then complete an interview with an embassy official - Which costs 170 quid.

All because of a fcuking drunk and disorderly charge when I was 19.

I thing i'll just book the flights and take the risk.......

daithip

Just wondering Scally if you were charged with 1 or 2 offences under the public order act? That means if 2 offences, were you convicted of one and given the probation act for the other or if 1 offence did you pay 200 quid to charity and were given the probation act?

johnciall

"The probation Act" is not recorded on any criminal record, it's a judges way of giving you another chance, it's not recorded anywhere and won't impact on you getting into another country.

Scally07

daithip wrote: »

Just wondering Scally if you were charged with 1 or 2 offences under the public order act? That means if 2 offences, were you convicted of one and given the probation act for the other or if 1 offence did you pay 200 quid to charity and were given the probation act?

Yeah they threw in threatening behaviour for good measure, have to say that never occured to me, I just presumed the fine and probation act was for both offences.

To be honest I just wanted it over and done with - plead guilty, i'm very sorry etc... Never even got a solicitor just paid the fine within an hour and that was the end of it.

Is it a case where you ring up the station you were brought to and seek clarification on your file or is there other methods?

cheers for the input btw

daithip

Don't fully know the whole story on just heading there on a holiday but I know you have to apply through your local Garda Station for a cert of character when heading there for work or study, that you have to send on to the U.S embassy, but don't think minor infringremnet of the road traffic act or public order have much effect. Think they just want to make sure you're not a drug dealer or arms smuggler:rolleyes:. U.S immigration will probably be pretty tight though due to the expected mass emigration from here because of the recession, so expect to be stopped and questioned and maybe refused entry.

Tom Young

Bottom Line:

1. Probation Act - No Conviction;

2. Fine [Poor box, charity] - No conviction; and

3. Adult Caution - No conviction.

Call an embassy and tell them your name and that you have a concern - you will be queried further and put through the 'wringer'.

Any further legal advice needs to be gotten by consulting a solicitor.

Thanks,

Tom

dermot_sheehan

Probation Act means no conviction but the U.S. also asks if you were arrested for a crime of moral turpitude. An arrest under section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 does not appear to be a crime of moral turpitude.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude

In any case the united states does not have access to irish records so would only be aware of your arrest if you disclosed it to them.

Tom Young

gabhain7 wrote: »

Probation Act means no conviction but the U.S. also asks if you were arrested for a crime of moral turpitude. An arrest under section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 does not appear to be a crime of moral turpitude.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude

In any case the united states does not have access to irish records so would only be aware of your arrest if you disclosed it to them.

Exactly - So then answer is no.

It's like the signs in Dublin and Shannon airports - "You are now on US soil" - No you're not!

Tom

EamoS

What if you had been charged of a crime, but were awaiting trial as in my case? Do US authorities have access to information that a charge had been made against me? Any help greatly appreciated

Croc

1. Probation Act - No Conviction;

Just to clarify

Probation Act in District Court - No Conviction

Probation Act in Circuit Court - Is a Conviction

partyguinness

Croc wrote: »

1. Probation Act - No Conviction;

Just to clarify

Probation Act in District Court - No Conviction

Probation Act in Circuit Court - Is a Conviction

That is not correct.

There is no difference between getting the Probation Act in the District Court or the Circuit Court

Bottom line = No conviction but the Gardai do keep it in their own records so if you are in Court again they tell the Judge that you had the benefit of the Probation Act before. It's basically your last chance card and you wont get it again.

Croc

partyguinness wrote: »

That is not correct.

There is no difference between getting the Probation Act in the District Court or the Circuit Court

She was misinformed

Read This Section 1(1) refers to District Court Section 1(2) refers to Circuit Court

The Key word in Section 1(2) is Conviction

partyguinness

Croc wrote: »

She was misinformed

Read This Section 1(1) refers to District Court Section 1(2) refers to Circuit Court

The Key word in Section 1(2) is Conviction

Exactly "conviction" is the key word.

Section 1(2) means the Circuit Court can ask the Defendant to enter a Bond (recognizance) for, say 2 years.."the Court may". That is simply an extra power the Circuit Court has. The District Court also has the same powers "on conviction".

But the Circuit Court also has summary jurisdiction and uses Section 1(1) to avoid recording a conviction. If someone is convicted in the Circuit Court then it is a convcition and this point does not arise. Section 1(2) is in addition to any other sentence the court hands down on conviction.

You can be convicted in the Circuit Court and given, say, a 3 month suspended sentence and also required to enter into recognizence for, say, 2 years under Secion 1(2).

You are either convicted or given the Probation Act.

If you are dismissed under the Probation Act = No Conviction in District or Circuit Court.

asterix

partyguinness wrote: »

Exactly "conviction" is the key word.

Section 1(2) means the Circuit Court can ask the Defendant to enter a Bond (recognizance) for, say 2 years.."the Court may". That is simply an extra power the Circuit Court has. The District Court also has the same powers "on conviction".

But the Circuit Court also has summary jurisdiction and uses Section 1(1) to avoid recording a conviction. If someone is convicted in the Circuit Court then it is a convcition and this point does not arise. Section 1(2) is in addition to any other sentence the court hands down on conviction.

You can be convicted in the Circuit Court and given, say, a 3 month suspended sentence and also required to enter into recognizence for, say, 2 years under Secion 1(2).

You are either convicted or given the Probation Act.

If you are dismissed under the Probation Act = No Conviction in District or Circuit Court.

You're wrong partyguiness. croc is right.
The Circuit Court is not a court of summary jurisdiction.
In fact, the District Court is the only "court of summary jurisdiction" in the land.
Therefore, S.1(1) simply cannot be used by the Circuit Court.
Although the Circuit Court can rely on S.1(2) to treat someone leniently by placing a defendant on a bond and give them the "benefit of the Probation Act" it must always convict the person before availing of this option.
You are correct to say that the District Court may utilise S.1(1) or the Circuit Court use S.1(2) alongside the imposition of some other sanction but they are also freestanding provisions and may be used without imposing some other sanction.
However, it should be said that the use of S.1(2) in the Circuit Court is a relatively rare, as more serious crimes are heard in that court. The vast majority of "Probation Act" dismissals occur in the District Court and arise in relation to minor offences such as intoxication, breach of the peace, theft of food etc.
Other posters have bandied about the term "fine". A "fine" only follows on from a conviction. However, payment to a charity/court poor box is not properly described as a fine. If such a payment is made, it is usually accompanied (in the District Court) by the striking out of the matter (best result, as there really is no record of the matter) or, more usually, by dismissal under S.1(1)(a) of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907.
Some District Court judges are happy to strike out matters that are very minor but most believe it is not appropriate to leave absolutely no trace of a case and prefer to use S.1(1)(a) of the Probation Act.
The gardai are entitled to keep a record of a "dismissal" under the Probation Act so that a person doesn't get the benefit of it again but it remains the case that the person is technically conviction free.
In terms of the OP's query, there is nothing to worry about. I would guess that they weren't actually "fined" but rather paid 200 euro in return for a dismissal under the Probation Act. But as a later poster said, even if the OP had been convicted and fined, breach of the peace is not a crime of moral turpitude so there is no need to declare it on the form required to get into the US for a holiday.
Of course, I'm sure it is a different matter if you're applying for residency etc. there. Presumably the relevant forms would require a higher level of disclosure.
A more interesting query is the one raised by the poster wondering about a charge that has not yet been processed. The regular form for entry for a holiday requires you to declare if you have ever been "arrested" for a crime of moral turpitude so it would really depend on the nature of the crime alleged against you.

partyguinness

asterix wrote: »

You're wrong partyguiness. croc is right.
The Circuit Court is not a court of summary jurisdiction.
In fact, the District Court is the only "court of summary jurisdiction" in the land.
Therefore, S.1(1) simply cannot be used by the Circuit Court.
Although the Circuit Court can rely on S.1(2) to treat someone leniently by placing a defendant on a bond and give them the "benefit of the Probation Act" it must always convict the person before availing of this option.
You are correct to say that the District Court may utilise S.1(1) or the Circuit Court use S.1(2) alongside the imposition of some other sanction but they are also freestanding provisions and may be used without imposing some other sanction.
However, it should be said that the use of S.1(2) in the Circuit Court is a relatively rare, as more serious crimes are heard in that court. The vast majority of "Probation Act" dismissals occur in the District Court and arise in relation to minor offences such as intoxication, breach of the peace, theft of food etc.
Other posters have bandied about the term "fine". A "fine" only follows on from a conviction. However, payment to a charity/court poor box is not properly described as a fine. If such a payment is made, it is usually accompanied (in the District Court) by the striking out of the matter (best result, as there really is no record of the matter) or, more usually, by dismissal under S.1(1)(a) of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907.
Some District Court judges are happy to strike out matters that are very minor but most believe it is not appropriate to leave absolutely no trace of a case and prefer to use S.1(1)(a) of the Probation Act.
The gardai are entitled to keep a record of a "dismissal" under the Probation Act so that a person doesn't get the benefit of it again but it remains the case that the person is technically conviction free.
In terms of the OP's query, there is nothing to worry about. I would guess that they weren't actually "fined" but rather paid 200 euro in return for a dismissal under the Probation Act. But as a later poster said, even if the OP had been convicted and fined, breach of the peace is not a crime of moral turpitude so there is no need to declare it on the form required to get into the US for a holiday.
Of course, I'm sure it is a different matter if you're applying for residency etc. there. Presumably the relevant forms would require a higher level of disclosure.
A more interesting query is the one raised by the poster wondering about a charge that has not yet been processed. The regular form for entry for a holiday requires you to declare if you have ever been "arrested" for a crime of moral turpitude so it would really depend on the nature of the crime alleged against you.

Although the Circuit Court can rely on S.1(2) to treat someone leniently by placing a defendant on a bond and give them the "benefit of the Probation Act" it must always convict the person before availing of this option

Yes but the CC can use Section 1(1) to avoid a conviction. That is my point. You seem to be under the impression that the CC can only use the Probation Act on conviction thereby triggering section 1(2).

Therefore, S.1(1) simply cannot be used by the Circuit Court.

This is incorrect. As the CC is the Court of Appeal from the DC, what you are effectively saying is that the DC has powers that the CC does not have. That is an incorrect on several levels.

If the person has been convicted then it doesnt matter; a conviction is a conviction and section 1(2) is just asking the guilty party to enter into a good behaviour bond for, 2 years.

In fact recently a client of mine got the Probation Act in the Circuit Court on a charge of handling stolen goods and she was not asked to enter into a Bond under Section 1(2). She was given the "benefit" of Section 1(1).

I know the Circuit Court is not a court of summary jurisdiction I never said that.

If you are convicted in the Circuit Court then the Court can ask you to enter into a Bond but that is still a conviction. In the Circuit Court, the Court can also use Section 1(1) in lieu of the conviction like the District Court with the same result.

Probation Act in the District Court or the Circuit Court = No conviction recorded.

I have seen it countless times.

Our man in Havana

Probation Act in the District Court or the Circuit Court = No conviction recorded.

I have seen it countless times.

I would agree.