Logo of A&M Canadian Immigration law Corporation

Can a U.S. Domestic Abuse Offence Become Serious Enough to Cause Criminal Inadmissibility in Canadian Immigration?

In Canada, “domestic violence” is usually prosecuted using general Criminal Code offences (assault, assault with a weapon/bodily harm/choking, threats, criminal harassment). The intimate-partner context is typically an aggravating factor at sentencing rather than a separate standalone offence.
Source: Justice Canada (family violence laws)
Source: Criminal Code assault framework (s. 265–267)

For U.S. convictions, officers do equivalency (match to a Canadian offence) and then assess criminal inadmissibility under IRPA s. 36.
Source: IRPA s. 36

1) Key Canadian equivalents and why “hybrid” matters

A) Common “domestic” equivalent: Assault (s. 266) — hybrid

Simple assault in Canada is s. 266 (with the definition of assault in s. 265). It is a hybrid offence.
 Source: s. 265
 Source: s. 266

Immigration effect of hybrid: IRPA says that a hybrid offence is deemed indictable for inadmissibility analysis.
Source: IRPA s. 36(3)(a)

Result: for a foreign national, an offence equivalent to s. 266 can commonly trigger ordinary criminality under IRPA s. 36(2) (because it is treated as indictable).
Source: IRPA s. 36(2) and 36(3)(a)

B) Higher-risk “domestic” equivalent: Assault with a weapon / bodily harm / choking (s. 267) — hybrid + 10-year max

Canada’s s. 267 covers:

        weapon use/threat,

        bodily harm, and

        choking/strangling/suffocating.
 It is hybrid, and if prosecuted by indictment it carries a maximum of 10 years.
 Source: Criminal Code s. 267

Why this can be treated as “serious”: Once equivalency is established, a foreign conviction that matches a Canadian offence with a 10-year maximum can fall within serious criminality analysis under IRPA s. 36(1).
Source: IRPA s. 36(1)(b)

Important: Hybrid status alone doesn’t make it serious; the 10-year maximum does.

2) U.S. Canada equivalency examples (CA / NY / MN)

State

Common domestic-abuse charge

Likely Canadian equivalent

Why it can trigger inadmissibility

California

PC 243(e)(1) (domestic battery – within PC 243)

Often s. 266 (assault)

s. 266 is hybrid deemed indictable ordinary criminality risk

California

PC 273.5 (corporal injury)

Often s. 267(b) (bodily harm)

s. 267 has 10-year max can be treated as serious criminality

New York

PL 120.00 (assault 3rd)

Often s. 266

hybrid deemed indictable

New York

PL 121.11 (obstruction of breathing/blood circulation)

Often s. 267(c) (choking/strangling)

s. 267 has 10-year max can be treated as serious criminality

Minnesota

609.2242 (domestic assault)

Often s. 266

hybrid deemed indictable

Minnesota

609.2247 (domestic assault by strangulation)

Often s. 267(c)

10-year max can be treated as serious criminality

Sources:

        IRPA s. 36

        Canada s. 266

        Canada s. 267

        CA PC 273.5

        NY PL 121.11

        MN 609.2247

3) Clear summary: “Hybrid” vs “Serious”

        Hybrid offence treated as indictable for inadmissibility.

        Serious criminality typically when the Canadian equivalent has a maximum of 10+ years (like s. 267) or other s. 36(1) triggers apply.
 Source: IRPA s. 36(1), 36(2), 36(3)(a)

Call A&M Canadian Immigration Law Corporation: (204) 442-2786
 If your record involves domestic assault, especially injuries or strangulation allegations, an equivalency review can determine whether the Canadian match is s. 266 (often ordinary criminality risk) or s. 267 (often serious criminality risk) under IRPA s. 36.

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. U.S. offences vary by state and outcomes depend on the exact statute, offence date, and court records.

Sources (hyperlinks)

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Yes. If it equates to a Canadian hybrid offence (like s. 266), IRPA treats it as indictable for inadmissibility screening.

     Because it often equates to s. 267(c), and s. 267 carries a 10-year maximum on indictment—often pushing the analysis into serious criminality.

    Visit our Social Media:

    CATEGORIES

    Send Us A Message

    Contact our office for details. Our immigration legal service in Winnipeg will assess your eligibility per CIC criteria and submit your application.