I just have a quick question regarding my husband and crossing the border. We applied for our passports and were looking at information online about what we could buy and the rules for crossing when my husband came across a section about not bothering to cross if you've been arrested/convicted of a crime.

My husband was never actually convicted, nor was he guilty of his crime, and I'll describe the situation. Basically he was working at a convenience store about 8 years ago, and on camera was seen putting a piece of paper into his pocket which was a coupon for a car wash (one that has zero value and employees were allowed to take) but the manager of the store called the police because they started saying he stole a $20 Fido card (this place had a lot of theft problems from other employees, and my husband ended up being the fall for things he wasn't doing) which was not true, he never had it on him, never used any Fido card, and didn't have a use for it since he didn't even have a cell phone. The police did take him down to the police station (not in handcuffs though I don't think that matters), was photographed and fingerprinted, received a paper with a court date, but after that, nothing. He doesn't remember what went on because his parents hired a lawyer who said he'd "take care of everything" - and asking them, they reply "don't worry about it", and I'm thinking because it was so long ago, they don't really remember the details.

My question is, even though there was no court date, there was no settlement (he just got fired, wrongfully I might add) there was no conviction and there was no diversion program, he never paid fines, he never made a plea, but all the charges were dropped, will the fact that he was fingerprinted and photographed and gave the police information stop him from crossing the border? Even if he was wrongfully accused and never went to court? Also, we live in Quebec, not sure if the Province matters here or not.

Thanks for any replies.

No, if the charges were really dropped, it has no effect on him crossing the border.

In one paragraph you say that he got a paper for a "court date" and in the next paragraph you say that there was no court date. I'm confused.

He says that he received the paper from the officer who arrested him that said he was to show up for fingerprints on a certain date, and court on another. The fingerprinting happened, but the court case never happened. That's why I'm wondering if there's anything to it, since he was brought in on suspicion, but there was nothing they could charge him on (I'm assuming the court date might have been something preliminary not sure) and after getting fingerprinted, he saw a lawyer, and that's pretty much where everything died.

Did he just not show up for the court date? If that's the case there may be a warrant out for his arrest.

No, he obviously doesn't have a warrant out for his arrest. Not only have we applied and received a mortgage (which I don't think they give to any wanted criminal) but he has been pulled over by the cops (for a tail light) and nothing came up there, not to mention his parents hired a lawyer, like I mentioned, who took care of things and said that nothing further would happen with the case, and the charges were dropped.

My original question still stands though, and it's even though he was never charged and nothing ever went forward, does the fact that he was fingerprinted and brought in to a police station mean he has a record of any kind that will get us turned back at the border?

Also I reread your question, and you totally mis-understand.

He is guilty, he accepted guilt and plead guilty to get into the program. So according to the courts he is guilty.

Posted to this post in error, ** no idea why? sorry for the confusion, was answering a person about a diversion program

Oh, gosh, now I feel bad. :( I totally thought you mis-read my comment (because I had mentioned diversion and that he never went there so no one asked). Sorry. :(