Author name: amcaimredesign

If you have a U.S. conviction involving threats (text messages, calls, social media posts, in-person statements) and you plan to visit, study, work, or immigrate to Canada, Canadian officers may assess you for criminal inadmissibility under IRPA s. 36 after doing a criminal equivalency match to a Canadian offence. 1) The Canadian baseline: Criminal Code s. 264.1 (Uttering threats) Canada’s “uttering threats” offence covers knowingly uttering or conveying threats: ●        (a) to cause death or bodily harm; ●        (b) to burn/destroy/damage real or personal property; or ●        (c) to kill/poison/injure an animal/bird that is someone’s property. Canadian punishment (important for immigration) ●        Threats under (1)(a) (death/bodily harm): hybrid; up to 5 years if prosecuted by indictment. ●        Threats under (1)(b) or (c) (property/animal): hybrid; up to 2 years if prosecuted by indictment. Why “hybrid” matters for inadmissibility IRPA treats hybrid offences as indictable when determining criminal inadmissibility for foreign nationals. That means a U.S. conviction that matches s. 264.1 can still trigger ordinary criminality analysis under IRPA s. 36(2). Important clarity: Uttering threats usually does not meet the “10+ year maximum” threshold that commonly drives serious criminality for foreign convictions. Instead, it is more often analyzed under ordinary criminality for foreign nationals (or serious criminality only in other specific scenarios). 2) Equivalency chart: U.S. threats offences → likely Canadian matches Canadian equivalency depends on the elements and the court record. Here are common matches for the three states you’ve been focusing on: Jurisdiction Common threats offence What it typically requires Likely Canadian equivalent California Penal Code § 422 (criminal threats) Willful threat to commit a crime resulting in death or great bodily injury, intent it be taken as a threat, and it causes sustained fear Often closest to s. 264.1(1)(a) (threats of death/bodily harm) New York Penal Law § 240.30(1) (aggravated harassment 2nd degree—threats by communication) Threat to cause physical harm or unlawful harm to property via communication + victim reasonably fears harm; class A misdemeanor Often analyzed against s. 264.1(1)(a) (physical harm) and/or s. 264.1(1)(b) (property threats), depending on record Minnesota Stat. § 609.713 (threats of violence) Threaten to commit a crime of violence with purpose to terrorize (or reckless disregard), max 5 years Often closest to s. 264.1(1)(a) (death/bodily harm threats), depending on the threatened act 3) When U.S. threats laws can be “broader” than Canada’s (and why records matter) Even if the offence label looks similar, differences can matter for equivalency, such as: ●        whether the law requires the victim to be in sustained fear (California does) ●        whether the law focuses on harassment + threat by communication (New York’s 240.30) ●        whether the law requires a threat of a crime of violence (Minnesota does) Because of these differences, the charging document and the record of conviction often decide which Canadian paragraph applies: ●        s. 264.1(1)(a) (death/bodily harm) vs ●        s. 264.1(1)(b) (property) vs ●        s. 264.1(1)(c) (animal). 4) How this ties to criminal inadmissibility (plain language) Once equivalency is identified: ●        Foreign nationals (visitors, students, workers) can be found inadmissible for ordinary criminality if the Canadian equivalent would be treated as indictable (hybrid deemed indictable). ●        Threats convictions are frequently assessed at the ordinary criminality level because the Canadian max penalties here are 5 years / 2 years, not 10+. Call A&M Canadian Immigration Law Corporation: (204) 442-2786  If you have a threats-related conviction from California, New York, or Minnesota, a document-based equivalency review can clarify the closest match to Criminal Code s. 264.1 and how IRPA s. 36 may apply. Disclaimer (Educational Use Only) This content is for general educational and informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Immigration laws, regulations, and officer practices can change. U.S. criminal laws vary by state and can change over time, and outcomes depend on the exact statute, offence date, and official court records. Sources (hyperlinks) ●        Canada — Criminal Code s. 264.1 (uttering threats) ●        California — Penal Code § 422 (criminal threats) ●        New York — Penal Law § 240.30 (aggravated harassment 2nd degree) ●        Minnesota — Stat. § 609.713 (threats of violence) ●        Canada — IRPA s. 36 (criminal inadmissibility framework) Frequently Asked Questions Can I be refused entry to Canada for a threats conviction even if it was “only a misdemeanor” in the U.S.? Yes. The U.S. label is not decisive. If the offence matches a Canadian hybrid offence like s. 264.1, IRPA treats it as indictable for inadmissibility analysis. Does online or texting count?  Yes. Canada’s s. 264.1 applies to threats conveyed “in any manner.” Is it always serious criminality? Usually not based on the “10-year maximum” test. It is more commonly analyzed under ordinary criminality for foreign nationals (equivalency + hybrid deemed indictable). Latest News Can an Indecent Act in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Public Nudity or Indecent Exposure in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Sexual Assault in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Uttering Threats in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Voyeurism in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Citizens and U.S. Residents Entering Canada Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Travelers: Why “10 Years From the Offence” Isn’t Always the Right Rule Read More Graffiti and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York, Minnesota Read More Mischief (Vandalism) and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York and Minnesota Read More Organized Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada (IRPA s. 37) with California, New York, Minnesota Examples Read More When Does Assaulting a Peace Officer or Resisting Arrest Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More White-Collar Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility to Canada Read More Why Is Tran Mostly About Serious Criminality, Not Ordinary Criminality, in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does Fraud in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does

(Canada vs California, New York, Minnesota — for people trying to visit, study, work, or immigrate to Canada) Voyeurism cases (secretly observing or recording someone nude or engaged in sexual activity) are treated very seriously. A U.S. conviction involving surreptitious recording or unlawful surveillance can lead to criminal inadmissibility under IRPA s. 36 after Canadian equivalency is assessed.  IRPA s. 36: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-2.5/section-36.html Canada’s offence (s. 162) Criminal Code s. 162 prohibits surreptitiously observing or recording a person who is nude, exposing genital organs, or engaged in explicit sexual activity in circumstances giving rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy (including recordings made for a sexual purpose).  Criminal Code s. 162: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-162.html Equivalency chart (typical comparisons) U.S. state Common offence Typical Canadian match California Invasion of privacy / concealed recording (PC 647(j)) Often Criminal Code s. 162 New York Unlawful surveillance (PL 250.45) Often s. 162 Minnesota Interference with privacy / surreptitious recording (MN 609.746) Often s. 162 Call A&M Canadian Immigration Law Corporation: (204) 442-2786 Disclaimer: Educational only, not legal advice; laws and policies can change; U.S. laws vary by state. Sources: ●        IRPA s. 36 ●        Criminal Code s. 162 ●        California PC 647(j) ●        New York PL 250.45 ●        Minnesota 609.746 Frequently Asked Questions Can this affect my study permit/work permit application? Yes—criminal inadmissibility can affect temporary resident applications. (IRPA s. 36) What if the video was never posted online?  Recording itself can be enough, depending on the statute and facts. Latest News Can an Indecent Act in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Public Nudity or Indecent Exposure in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Sexual Assault in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Uttering Threats in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Voyeurism in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Citizens and U.S. Residents Entering Canada Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Travelers: Why “10 Years From the Offence” Isn’t Always the Right Rule Read More Graffiti and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York, Minnesota Read More Mischief (Vandalism) and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York and Minnesota Read More Organized Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada (IRPA s. 37) with California, New York, Minnesota Examples Read More When Does Assaulting a Peace Officer or Resisting Arrest Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More White-Collar Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility to Canada Read More Why Is Tran Mostly About Serious Criminality, Not Ordinary Criminality, in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does Fraud in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does Break and Enter in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More What Is Criminal Inadmissibility Under Canadian Immigration Law? (IRPA s. 36) Read More What Are Essential Elements for U.S.-to-Canada Offence Equivalency in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can a U.S. Domestic Abuse Offence Become Serious Enough to Cause Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Tran v. Canada (2017 SCC 50): Which Law Applies, and Why Does Timing Matter for Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More How Does U.S.-to-Canada Criminal Equivalency Work in Canadian Immigration? A Detailed Guide Using Brannson and Hill. Read More How Do PR Removal and Serious Criminality Impact Canadian Immigration and Criminal Inadmissibility? Read More How Do Officers Determine Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration Using U.S. Records? Read More For U.S. Cases, How Does “Convicted” vs “Committed an Act” Affect Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration Inside vs Outside Canada? Read More Federal, Manitoba Provincial, and Youth Offences: What Counts for Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More DUI / DWI Comparative Chart for Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration: Canada vs. California (Los Angeles) vs. New York vs. Minnesota Read More Difference Between Serious and Ordinary Criminality in Canadian Immigration? Read More Criminal Inadmissibility: Is There a Conviction or Not? (U.S. Dispositions and Canadian Immigration) Read More Charges or Acquittals Still Affect Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Uttering Threats in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can U.S. Offences Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration for Serious Criminality Under IRPA s. 36(1)? Read More Can U.S. Offences Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration for Ordinary Criminality Under IRPA s. 36(2)? Read More Can Simple Cannabis Possession Cause Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration Before vs. After October 17, 2018? Read More Can Joyriding in the U.S. Trigger Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration, or Does It Often Fall Outside IRPA s. 36? Read More Can Harassment or Stalking Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Canada vs. California, New York, and Minnesota Read More Can Dangerous or Careless Driving in Manitoba Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Canada’s Cannabis Act Trigger Criminal Inadmissibility Under IRPA s. 36 in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Assault With a Weapon Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Canada vs. California, New York, and Minnesota Read More Can a Theft Conviction or Committing a Theft Offence in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can a Grand Theft Auto Conviction or Auto Theft Offence in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can a Broader U.S. Arson Law Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? California, New York, and Minnesota Compared Read More Can “Simple Possession” in California, New York, or Minnesota Trigger Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration Through Equivalency? Read More Can “Committing an Act” Cause Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration Without a Conviction? Read More Applying Tran to U.S. Records: When Does Canada Use the Law at the Time of the Offence Instead of Today’s Law for Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Applying Tran to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration: Do Officers Use the Law at the

If you have a U.S. criminal record and want to visit, study, work, or immigrate to Canada, you may still be admissible if you meet the legal test for deemed rehabilitation—a time-based way some people overcome criminal inadmissibility. What “deemed rehabilitation” means (U.S. practical view) ●        It is not automatic in practice—an officer still assesses whether you meet the legal conditions. ●        If you live in the U.S., IRCC specifically notes you may travel to a Canadian Port of Entry and ask to be assessed (with supporting documents). Who can qualify (core legal rules) Canada’s Regulations set out “prescribed classes” of people who can be deemed rehabilitated. 1) One foreign conviction (most common U.S. scenario) You may qualify if you have no more than one U.S. conviction that would be an indictable offence in Canada, and: ●        the Canadian equivalent has a maximum penalty of less than 10 years, and ●        10 years have passed since the day after you completed all parts of the sentence (jail, probation, fines, restitution, etc.), and ●        you do not have disqualifying convictions in Canada or outside Canada in the relevant time periods set out in the Regulation. 2) Two or more “summary-equivalent” foreign convictions You may qualify where you have two or more foreign convictions that would be summary conviction offences in Canada, and at least 5 years have passed since the day after completion of the imposed sentences (plus other conditions in the Regulation). 3) One act (no conviction) outside Canada You may qualify if you committed no more than one act outside Canada (that was an offence where committed) that would be indictable in Canada, where: ●        the Canadian equivalent has a maximum penalty of less than 10 years, and ●        10 years have passed since the day after the commission of the offence, and ●        other disqualifying-conviction conditions in the Regulation do not apply. Who usually does NOT qualify (quick flags) ●        Any offence that would be punishable in Canada by 10 years or more (deemed rehab is aimed at non-serious matters). ●        Multiple incidents, recent convictions, or missing proof that your sentence is fully completed. ●        Higher-risk facts (IRCC notes examples like serious property damage, physical harm, or weapons when discussing POE eligibility screening). If you’re in the U.S.: how POE assessment works IRCC’s deemed rehabilitation page explains that if you live in the U.S., you may go to a Canadian Port of Entry and ask to be assessed—bringing documents supporting your claim. Bring (typical examples IRCC lists): ●        passport/ID ●        court records for each conviction + proof sentence completed ●        recent criminal record check ●        police certificates as applicable (including where you lived 6+ months in the last 10 years). CBSA also notes that people may still be allowed to enter if they convince an officer they meet the legal terms to be deemed rehabilitated. A document-based review can confirm whether your U.S. offence is equivalent to a Canadian offence with a maximum under 10 years, and whether the “10-year/5-year” timing rules are satisfied. Disclaimer (Educational Use Only) This content is for general educational information only and is not legal advice. Immigration laws, regulations, policies, and officer practices can change. For a detailed admissibility analysis, you can reach the best immigration lawyer to assess whether you or someone you know may be inadmissible. Sources (hyperlinks) ●       IRCC — Deemed rehabilitation (incl. U.S. Port of Entry assessment + self-assessment criteria) ●        IRPR s. 18 — “Deemed rehabilitated” classes and conditions (10-year / 5-year rules) ●        CBSA — Inadmissibility overview (mentions deemed rehabilitation as an option) Frequently Asked Questions Is deemed rehabilitation guaranteed? No. IRCC states a request is not guaranteed to be approved. When does the “10 years” start?  Under the Regulation, it runs from the day after completion of the imposed sentence (for convictions) or the day after commission (for the “one act” route). If I don’t qualify, what are my options? IRCC points to individual rehabilitation if you are not deemed rehabilitated. Latest News Can an Indecent Act in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Public Nudity or Indecent Exposure in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Sexual Assault in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Uttering Threats in California, New York, or Minnesota Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can Voyeurism in the U.S. Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Citizens and U.S. Residents Entering Canada Read More Deemed Rehabilitation for U.S. Travelers: Why “10 Years From the Offence” Isn’t Always the Right Rule Read More Graffiti and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York, Minnesota Read More Mischief (Vandalism) and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada vs California, New York and Minnesota Read More Organized Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility: Canada (IRPA s. 37) with California, New York, Minnesota Examples Read More When Does Assaulting a Peace Officer or Resisting Arrest Lead to Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More White-Collar Crime and Criminal Inadmissibility to Canada Read More Why Is Tran Mostly About Serious Criminality, Not Ordinary Criminality, in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does Fraud in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More When Does Break and Enter in the U.S. Make You Criminally Inadmissible in Canadian Immigration? Read More What Is Criminal Inadmissibility Under Canadian Immigration Law? (IRPA s. 36) Read More What Are Essential Elements for U.S.-to-Canada Offence Equivalency in Canadian Immigration? Read More Can a U.S. Domestic Abuse Offence Become Serious Enough to Cause Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More Tran v. Canada (2017 SCC 50): Which Law Applies, and Why Does Timing Matter for Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration? Read More How Does U.S.-to-Canada Criminal Equivalency Work in Canadian Immigration? A Detailed Guide Using Brannson and Hill. Read More How Do PR Removal and Serious Criminality Impact Canadian Immigration and Criminal Inadmissibility? Read More How Do Officers