So my husband got a DUI in September of last year. He was just told by one of the other people attending one of his mandatory classes that he’d be unable now to travel to Canada with this on his record.
I’ve been Googling around trying to figure this out, and it seems true. I’m also trying to see what can be done about this. The best I can make out is that you can travel to Canada even with a DUI if you fill out and file some paperwork. I’ve been trying to find out the particulars, but the websites I’m looking at are as clear as mud.
The information your husband received is correct. A DUI conviction is a criminal conviction in Canada (we ignore the American felony/misdemeanor distinction) and convicted criminals are generally not allowed to enter Canada.
Note I said “generally.” There can be exceptions. More information is available from the Canadian government’s website:
And it appears that the paperwork he will need is here:
No. that’s simply a procedural distinction that mainly goes to sentence: higher sentences if convicted by way of indictment.
There’s only two main offences: driving with a BAC greater than .08, or driving while impaired. The Crown can choose to proceed summarily or by indictment on the charges, but either way, if a person is convicted it shows on their record as a conviction for .08 or driving while impaired.
A hybrid offence under the Criminal Code of Canada means the Crown could elect to prosecute the offence either as a summary offence or as an indictable offence.
Under the Canada’s Immigration Act s. 36 (2) (c) et alia, an offence that could be prosecuted as an indictable offence (i.e. an indictable or a hybrid offence) were it in Canada = non-admissible, where as an offence that could only be prosecuted as a summary offence were it in Canada = admissible.
It is irrelevant whether the conviction in the USA was for a misdemeanor or for a felony.
Conviction = a conviction (which usually means a conviction that was made upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt).
Committed = a reason to believe that based on a balance of probabilities that the offence as defined in Canada had been committed, regardless of whether or not there had been a conviction.
For example, let’s say that in Canada mopery is a heinous, nasty indictable offence, whereas in the USA, mopery is a respected profession. In the USA, Uncle Jimmy proudly advertised himself as the best professional moper in all of the nation. Upon his giving the fine officers of CBSA his business card and stating his occupation, he would be politely but firmly turned back at the Canadian border because on a balance of probabilities it appeared that he had moped, regardless of moping not being illegal in the USA, and there not being evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he actually had moped.
i had no idea. . . i change planes in vancouver on my way to seoul next week. i have a dui from 15 yrs ago. does anyone here know what i need to do? i.ve tried google and all ive found so far are canadian law firms who would be willing to take my case - for a fee of course. do i need to get help? is there time? i understand that y’all cant give legal advise, but any info is appreciated!
Just to clarify why Muffin and I seem to be giving different answers: offences in Canada fall into one of three procedural categories: always indictable; always summary; or hybrid, where the Crown can choose to proceed either by indictment or summarily.
Impaired driving and driving over .08 BAC are hybrid offences. The Crown can choose to proceed summarily or by indictment.
However, there is only one offence of driving over 80, and only one offence of impaired driving, both found in s 253 of the Criminal Code. That’s what I was referring to when I said the summary/indictable distinction didn’t make a difference to entry.
It’s not like there is a summary offence of impaired/over 80, equivalent to a US misdemeanour, and an indictable offence, equivalent to a US felony. There is only one version of each of those offences, and since they are hybrid, they are considered indictable for the purpose of barging entry, as stated by Muffin.
Next week? Try to get proof of your having been clean since the conviction – a criminal records search signed by Officer Obie, and proof of your conviction and sentence.
Answer all CBSA questions absolutely honestly when you arrive in Canada.
If you have been clean for the last 10 years, the odds are very high that you will be deemed to have been rehabilitated and will be admissible to Canada with no further ado by the CBSA officer until the next time you enter Canada. Note that this is not a permanent rehabilitation, and you may very well have to go through this again and again and again when you cross at later dates. At any of these entries into Canada, there is no guarantee that the deemed rehabilitation will be granted, but the odds are very much in your favour, particularly if you are just making a connecting flight rather than driving across the country.
If they won’t give you a single-use deemed rehabilitation, a second option is to apply for a temporary resident permit that will let you be in Canada for a strictly limited period of time (enough to for you to get onto your connecting flight) despite your general inadmissibility. Ever wonder how hard parting rock musicians who have as many drug records as music records get in? TRPs.
Once you are back home in the USA, apply to Canada for a permanent criminal rehabilitation, which once granted will let you be admitted to Canada each time you go through customs and immigration.
These things have application fees, but I don’t recall what they are, so be sure to have a couple of hundred available (debit, credit, cash) every time you cross the border until you receive your permanent criminal rehabilitation.
As far as using paralegals and the like to help you with the paperwork for the permanent criminal rehabilitation, they don’t cost that much, and they will save you the bother of having to figure out the process for yourself. You won’t need a law firm for this sort of thing, other than possibly needing a Canadian lawyer’s letter stating what the Canadian equivalent of the American conviction would be, but the paralegal can line that up for you.
Oh, as far as the temporary resident permit goes, it might be done on the spot, or it might take up to a year, so you might as well just get on with the permanent rehabilitation and keep your fingers crossed that the single use deemed rehabilitations keep being granted until your permanent rehabilitation comes through.
i think i do have a copy of the court dispensation somewhere, guess i better find it! and i have been a good boy ever since - not even a speeding ticket!
it never would have dawned on me that that would even be a consideration in my travels.
Just curious… what about being convicted of “Physical Control”? It is similar to a DUI conviction, but it means the (drunk) person was simply sitting in a car that was parked. Here in Ohio, it is not uncommon for a first-time offender of DUI to plead down “physical control.” It is an M1 misdemeanor (same as a DUI), but does not incur any points on the driver license.
A friend of mine was denied entry into Canada years ago. He was traveling there to receive an award, so basically Canada asked him to come, then turned him away. My buddy was really pissed off. Event coordinators attempted to reach him to apologize. For a while his voicemail message included the line, “oh, and if this is Canada calling, fuck you, you poutine eating bastards”.
AFAIK, Canadian airports are, with the exception of the area for pre-cleared flights to the USA, usually set up like American airports, with no way to get to a gate without “entering the country.”