Drake v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-4050-98
Tremblay-Lamer J.
11/3/99
8 pp.
Application for judicial review of Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) decision quashing removal order issued against applicant in February 1994 and ordering deportation from Canada for being person described in Immigration Act, s. 27(1)(a.1)(ii)-Applicant born in U.S.A.-Became permanent resident in Canada in 1969-Moved to U.S.A. in 1990-Charged with child molestation in first degree in U.S. in March 1992-Fled to Canada in April 1992-Convicted in absentia in September 1992-Defendant initiated inquiry in 1993 to determine if applicant person described in Immigration Act, s. 27(1)(a.1)(i) or (ii)-Adjudicator concluded, in 1994, applicant person described in Immigration Act, s. 27(1)(a.1)(i)-Applicant filed appeal in 1994-U.S. authorities commenced extradition proceedings against applicant in late 1994-U.S. judge ordered verdict vacated as being void ab initio and applicant entered Alford plea of guilty (plea of guilty given likelihood of conviction high, prosecution's case and evidence, while maintaining innocence) to charge on which earlier conviction based-Sentenced to 68 months in prison-Applicant's 1994 appeal postponed and resumed in 1998-IAD quashed first removal order since underlying conviction had been declared void, but concluded applicant person described in Act, s. 27(1)(a.1)(ii)-Application dismissed-Applicant argued had not confessed to crime but had entered Alford plea-Act, s. 27(1)(a.1)(ii) only requiring on balance of probabilities that person has committed offence abroad-No error committed in relying on Alford plea to find that, on balance of probabilities, applicant had committed offence-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 27(1)(a.1) (as enacted by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 16).