In the Ninth Circuit, expungements that are analogous to the FFOA are effective to eliminate all adverse immigration effects of convictions of the following offenses:

 

(1)  simple possession of any controlled substance[52]

(2)  possession of drug paraphernalia[53]

 

There is a strong argument that expungements also eliminate the immigration effects of additional convictions for:

 

(3)  being under the influence of drugs,[54]

(4)  being under drug influence in public,[55]

(5)  driving under the influence of drugs,[56]

(6)  visiting a place where drugs are used,[57] and

(7)  any other first conviction of a controlled substance offense that is (a) more minor in potential punishment than first-offense simple possession, and (b) not expressly forbidden under federal controlled-substances statutes.[58] 

 

This is because the same reasoning that led the Ninth Circuit to extend Lujan to cover possession of paraphernalia, also leads to the same conclusion for these other minor offenses.[59]

[52] This would include California Health & Safety Code § § 11350, 11377, 11357, and the like.  Lujan, supra.

[53] California Health & Safety Code § 11364; Cardenas, supra.

[54] California Health & Safety Code § 11550.

[55] California Penal Code § 647(f) (drugs).

[56] California Vehicle Code § 23152(a) (forbidding driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or the combined influence of alcohol and drugs).

[57] California Health & Safety Code § 11365.

[58] This may include such offenses as prescription violations, possession of a needle under the Business and Professions Code, and the like, so long as (a) the punishment is more minor than simple possession, which, under California Health & Safety Code § 11350, is punishable by a maximum of three years in state prison, and (b) is not forbidden under federal controlled substances law.  A list of the controlled substances offenses forbidden under federal law may be found at N. Tooby, Criminal Defense of Immigrants, Appendix D (2007).  See Cardenas, supra.

[59] See Cardenas, supra.

Ninth Circuit

POST CON RELIEF " STATE REHABILITATIVE RELIEF " CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES " NINTH CIRCUIT " MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS CONVICTIONS
Jimenez Rice v. Holder, 597 F.3d 952, 2010 WL 669262 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2010) (remanding to BIA for its decision in the first instance the open question whether Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2000) eliminates the immigration effects of multiple simultaneous qualifying first-offense controlled substances convictions because the defendant would not have been disqualified from Federal First Offender Act treatment if prosecuted in federal court).

Other

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES " STATE REHABILITATIVE RELIEF " NINTH CIRCUIT " CHOICE OF LAW " VENUE " DEPARTMENT OF STATE WILL APPLY THE LAW OF THE CIRCUIT CONTAINING THE PORT OF ENTRY THROUGH WHICH THE NONCITIZEN INTENDS TO ENTER THE UNITED STATES
The Secretary of State, in an unclassified Advisory Opinion to the U.S. Embassy in Montevideo, stated that an expunged Washington state misdemeanor "first time, minor controlled substance offense relating only to possession" will not trigger inadmissibility as long as the alien intends to enter the U.S. from a port of entry in the Ninth Circuit, following Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2000). Courtesy of the firm of Gibbs Houston Pauw in Seattle.