The petty offense exception
A single crime involving moral turpitude does not make you inadmissible if the maximum possible sentence for the offense was one year or less and the sentence you actually received was six months or less. Both numbers have to fit. A suspended sentence counts in full. A second crime involving moral turpitude, at any time, ends the exception for both. It applies to the inadmissibility ground, and through it to adjustment, to naturalization and to a returning resident. It does not apply to the deportability ground for one such crime within five years of admission.
Current as of October 2026. We re-check this page regularly and after any rule change.
Two numbers and one count decide the petty offense exception. The maximum sentence the statute allowed: one year or less. The sentence the court imposed: six months or less, counting suspended time. And the count of crimes involving moral turpitude on the whole record: one. If all three fit, the moral turpitude ground of inadmissibility does not apply. This page takes the text, the traps in it, and each place the exception does and does not reach: admission and adjustment, cancellation, naturalization, and the returning resident. It ends with what the exception means for sentence negotiation in New York, New Jersey, Florida and federal court. The map of every criminal ground is on the crimes and removal page.
The text
INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) makes inadmissible a person convicted of, or who admits the essential elements of, a crime involving moral turpitude. INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) then says that clause (i)(I) does not apply to a person who committed only one offense, if
- the maximum penalty possible for the crime did not exceed one year of imprisonment, and
- if convicted, the sentence imposed did not exceed six months, regardless of suspension.
Both prongs are required. A one-year maximum with a nine-month sentence fails the second. A three-year maximum with a thirty-day sentence fails the first. And the exception is for one offense only; a second crime involving moral turpitude, at any time, takes the person outside it.
Alongside it, INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I) is the juvenile exception: the ground does not apply where the crime was committed when the person was under 18 and more than five years before the date of application for a visa or admission. A person can fit one exception, the other, or neither; the juvenile exception has no sentence test, and the petty offense exception has no age test.
A suspended sentence counts in full
The exception looks at the sentence imposed regardless of suspension, and INA 101(a)(48)(B) says a sentence includes the period of confinement ordered "regardless of any suspension of the imposition or execution of that imprisonment or sentence in whole or in part." A sentence of one year, suspended in full, is a one-year sentence. It fails the six-month prong even though you served no time. What the judge pronounces is what counts, not what you served.
INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), (ii)(I), (ii)(II); INA 101(a)(48)(B).
Where it applies, and where it does not
The exception is written into the inadmissibility ground. It follows that ground wherever the statute incorporates INA 212(a)(2), and it is absent wherever the statute uses a different test.
| Setting | Does the exception apply? | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| Admission, a visa, adjustment of status | Yes. Adjustment requires admissibility, and a person inside the exception is not inadmissible on the CIMT ground | INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II); INA 245(a)(2) |
| Deportability for one CIMT within five years of admission | No. INA 237(a)(2)(A)(i) has its own test, whether a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed, and no petty offense exception | INA 237(a)(2)(A)(i) |
| Deportability for two CIMTs | No, and a second CIMT ends the exception for both | INA 237(a)(2)(A)(ii) |
| Cancellation for non-permanent residents | The bar is a conviction of an offense "under" 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2) or 237(a)(3). The Board has held that the exception applies to a CIMT that would otherwise be a 212(a)(2) offense, but not to an offense that is independently a 237(a)(2) ground. | INA 240A(b)(1)(C); Matter of Cortez Canales, 25 I&N Dec. 301 (BIA 2010) |
| Good moral character, naturalization | Yes. The CIMT bar to good moral character is subject to the petty offense exception | INA 101(f)(3); 8 C.F.R. 316.10(b)(2) |
| Returning permanent residents | The statute treats a resident as seeking admission if they have "committed an offense identified in section 212(a)(2)." The exception is part of 212(a)(2). Beyond that text, whether a single petty offense makes a returning resident an applicant for admission is a question to ask us before you travel; see below | INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v) |
| TPS | Inadmissibility under 212(a)(2) cannot be waived for TPS, so whether the exception takes the conviction out of 212(a)(2) decides the criminal-ground question; the felony-or-two-misdemeanors bar is separate | INA 244(c)(2)(A)(iii), (B)(i) |
| The 212(h) waiver | Not needed for the CIMT ground where the exception applies, because there is no inadmissibility to waive | INA 212(h) |
Cancellation for non-permanent residents
The bar in INA 240A(b)(1)(C) is a conviction of an offense "under" 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2) or 237(a)(3). In Matter of Cortez Canales, 25 I&N Dec. 301 (BIA 2010), the Board held that the petty offense exception applies to a crime involving moral turpitude that would otherwise be a 212(a)(2) offense for this bar, but not to an offense that is independently a ground under 237(a)(2), such as one CIMT committed within five years of admission with a possible one-year sentence, or a second CIMT. Read that holding no more broadly than that. The practical point is that a single petty CIMT can leave non-LPR cancellation open, and a second one, or one that independently fits a 237(a)(2) ground, closes it. The stop-time rule is a separate question: INA 240A(d)(1) stops the clock when a person commits an offense referred to in 212(a)(2) that "renders" them inadmissible, and whether an offense inside the exception "renders" anyone inadmissible is a question to ask us about your record. The stop-time page covers that rule.
Naturalization
Good moral character is required for the statutory period, and a crime involving moral turpitude committed during that period is a conditional bar under INA 101(f)(3) and 8 C.F.R. 316.10(b)(2), subject to the petty offense exception. A single petty offense inside the exception is therefore not a listed bar. Two cautions from the same regulation: the application will not be approved until any probation, parole or suspended sentence has been completed, 8 C.F.R. 316.10(c)(1), and an unlawful act outside the listed bars may still be found to reflect adversely on character unless extenuating circumstances are shown, 8 C.F.R. 316.10(b)(3)(iii). The naturalization page covers the rest.
Returning residents
Under INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v), a permanent resident returning from travel is treated as an applicant for admission if they have committed an offense identified in 212(a)(2), unless 212(h) or 240A(a) relief has been granted since. Under Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012), that rule does not reach a conviction from before April 1, 1997. The exception is part of 212(a)(2), and the argument that a single petty offense is not an "offense identified in" that section follows from the text. That is an argument from the text, and we cannot point you to a published holding on it. A resident with one minor conviction should have that question answered before traveling, not at the airport. The travel page covers it.
What the exception means for the sentence
Because the exception has two numeric prongs, it is one of the most negotiable rules, and the negotiation is different in each court. What follows is the sentencing structure for each; whether any particular offense is a crime involving moral turpitude is a separate question that starts with the offense category and ends with reading your statute.
| Court | Offense level | Maximum | One-year prong | Six-month prong |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York | Class A misdemeanor | 364 days | Fits | Sentence must be six months or less |
| New York | Class B misdemeanor | Three months | Fits | Any lawful sentence fits |
| New York | Violation | 15 days; not a crime under state law, but adjudicated in a criminal proceeding it is a conviction for immigration purposes | Fits | Any lawful sentence fits |
| New Jersey | Disorderly persons offense | Six months | Fits | Any lawful sentence fits |
| New Jersey | Petty disorderly persons offense | 30 days | Fits | Any lawful sentence fits |
| New Jersey | Fourth-degree crime | 18 months | Fails | Irrelevant |
| Florida | First-degree misdemeanor | One year | Fits | Sentence must be six months or less |
| Florida | Second-degree misdemeanor | 60 days | Fits | Any lawful sentence fits |
| Florida | Third-degree felony | Five years | Fails | Irrelevant |
| Federal | Class A misdemeanor | One year or less, more than six months | Fits | Sentence must be six months or less |
| Federal | Felony | More than one year | Fails | Irrelevant |
N.Y. Penal Law 10.00(3), (4), (6), 70.15(1), (2), (4); N.J.S.A. 2C:1-4, 2C:43-6(a), 2C:43-8; Fla. Stat. 775.082(3), (4); 18 U.S.C. 3559(a).
Two things to notice. In New York, the 364-day class A misdemeanor maximum satisfies the one-year prong for every class A misdemeanor, so the whole negotiation is the six-month prong: a sentence of six months or less, counting suspended time, on a single count. The 364-day page explains the 2019 change. And in New Jersey, a disorderly persons offense carries a six-month maximum, so any lawful sentence on a single disorderly persons count fits both prongs; the fourth-degree crime, at 18 months, fails the first prong no matter the sentence. The 90-day figure that comes up in this conversation belongs to a different rule: the DACA regulation's listed-misdemeanor rule, 8 C.F.R. 236.22(b)(6), which includes any misdemeanor with a sentence of more than 90 days in custody. It is not part of the petty offense exception.
The safer plea for a person with no prior CIMT, where the count is a crime involving moral turpitude and cannot be changed, is one count, on an offense with a maximum of one year or less, with a pronounced sentence of six months or less. All three, in the judgment, on the day of the plea.
What this means at the plea
The exception does not make a conviction disappear. It takes one crime involving moral turpitude off the inadmissibility ground, for a person who has only one. It does nothing for the deportability ground for one CIMT within five years, nothing for a second CIMT, nothing for a drug conviction, and nothing for an aggravated felony, which has no sentence-based exception at the six-month level. A person who is admitted and charged with deportability needs a different analysis, on the moral turpitude page. A person seeking admission or adjustment, a person counting toward naturalization, and a resident who travels are the people it protects, and for them the six-month prong is often the single most important number in the plea agreement. The plea strategy pages cover how it is negotiated, and the deportability versus inadmissibility page explains which list applies to you.
Read next: crimes involving moral turpitude, the 364-day sentence, fraud and theft offenses, or travel after a plea.
Common questions
My sentence was suspended. Does the exception still apply?
It applies if the sentence imposed, counting the suspended portion, was six months or less. INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) applies where the sentence imposed did not exceed six months regardless of suspension, and INA 101(a)(48)(B) says a sentence includes any period of confinement ordered regardless of suspension. A six-month sentence suspended in full fits. A one-year sentence suspended in full does not, even if you served no time.
I have two minor convictions. Does the exception cover one of them?
No. The exception is for a person who committed only one crime involving moral turpitude. A second such offense, at any time, takes the person outside the exception entirely, and both convictions then count on the inadmissibility ground. How a second conviction that is not a crime involving moral turpitude interacts with the exception is a question to ask us. What we can tell you is that the exception is limited to one offense.
I am a permanent resident. Does the exception help me?
In some places and not others. It is not part of the one-CIMT deportability ground in INA 237(a)(2)(A)(i), so it does not answer a charge of deportability for one crime committed within five years of admission with a possible one-year sentence. It is part of INA 212(a)(2), so it matters for the returning-resident rule in INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v), for a new adjustment application, and for the good moral character analysis at naturalization, where the regulation applies it to the CIMT bar.
Does the exception apply to a drug conviction?
No. The exception in INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) is written for clause (i)(I), the crime involving moral turpitude ground. The controlled-substance ground in clause (i)(II) has no petty offense exception, and its only opening is the 212(h) waiver for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana.
Tell us about the charge before you take the plea. Not after.
You get a free conversation with an immigration attorney, in your language. We speak English, Russian, Spanish and Uzbek in-house, and we bring in a live interpreter for anything else. We will read the charge against the immigration statute, tell you what the offered plea does to your status and to every form of relief, and tell you what to ask your criminal lawyer to negotiate instead. If the plea has already been entered, we will tell you what can still be done.