Florida Criminal Charges & Immigration Consequences

A Guide for Immigration Attorneys

Call Today — Free Consultations.

If you’re an immigration attorney in Florida, you know that even a “minor” criminal charge can carry major immigration consequences for your noncitizen clients. A simple misdemeanor like petit theft, a domestic dispute, or possession of marijuana might seem manageable in state court, but it can make the difference between your client staying in the U.S. or being deported. Unfortunately, many criminal defense lawyers don’t fully grasp this intersection – and that’s where you, as immigration counsel, need the right partner. This comprehensive guide is written for immigration attorneys seeking criminal defense expertise that safeguards immigration status. We’ll break down common Florida crimes with immigration implications, explain how our firm (Mitkevicius Law) navigates them, and highlight why specialized counsel is crucial. We also include internal links to deeper resources on our site and authoritative external references (statutes, case law, etc.) so you can feel confident in referring cases or collaborating with us.

Josef Mitkevicius law firm is absolutely amazing! We had a difficult case and won! Mr.Josef stood behind us 100%! The communication was awesome, he returns calls, responds to emails and truly stands behind his clients with integrity, hard work and reasonable rates. We put our trust in Josef Mitkevicius and it was the best decision we made when it came to choosing a law firm, he is the best!

Adrianne

OUR TRIAL-READY CREED

At Mitkevicius Law, every case starts with a simple assumption: we may have to pick a jury. That mindset shapes everything we do—from rapid-fire discovery and preservation of speedy-trial rights to lining up expert witnesses who can dismantle shaky lab results or unreliable eyewitnesses. Prosecutors know we’re perfectly willing to try the “tough” cases other lawyers would plea out. And unlike most criminal-defense firms, we never tack on a separate “trial fee”—our flat fee already covers the fight all the way to a jury verdict, so financial pressure never forces a premature plea. That resolve often forces better offers and keeps all immigration-safe dispositions on the table, because the State understands we won’t trade our client’s future for convenience.

Below, we cover:

Florida misdemeanors like petit theft, battery/assault, domestic violence, and marijuana possession, and exactly how each can jeopardize a client’s immigration status.
How defendants who post bond can end up in ICE custody, and our unique use of Florida’s Rules of Criminal Procedure to waive their court appearance and avoid warrants – often leading to case dismissals or safer outcomes without the client present.
Proven strategies (drawn from practice and guidance like Padilla v. Kentucky) for immigration-safe plea agreements, diversion programs, and minimizing consequences – tailored for Florida law.
Why most criminal defense attorneys aren’t equipped to handle these issues (the “Padilla gap”), and how partnering with a criminal defense lawyer specialized in immigration consequences can protect your client and make your job easier.

Let’s dive into each type of offense and scenario in detail.

Theft of Firearm

Client faced 15 years in prison; case dismissed.

Petit Theft (Shoplifting) – A “Petty” Offense with Major Immigration Stakes

Florida Petit Theft Law: In Florida, “petit theft” typically means stealing property valued under $750. It can be a second-degree misdemeanor if under $100 (up to 60 days jail) or a first-degree misdemeanor if $100–$749 (up to 1 year in jail) . The statute is broad: a person commits theft by knowingly taking someone’s property with intent to “either temporarily or permanently” deprive the owner of rights or benefits . That temporary vs. permanent wording has big immigration implications – it historically raised arguments about whether Florida theft is a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT), since classic CIMT theft usually requires intent to permanently deprive. However, current law treats virtually any theft with intent to deprive (even temporarily) as a CIMT . In short, a conviction for petit theft = CIMT in the eyes of immigration authorities . And that spells trouble.

Immigration Consequences: Crimes involving moral turpitude have two main immigration effects: deportability and inadmissibility. A single CIMT conviction can make even an LPR deportable if it was committed within 5 years of admission and the offense is punishable by at least one year . Florida first-degree petit theft qualifies (punishable by 1 year), so a recent shoplifting offense can trigger the CIMT deportation ground for a client with status. Even if the client isn’t picked up by ICE immediately, a CIMT on record means if they travel abroad or apply for a new benefit, they could be found inadmissible (unless it falls under the narrow “petty offense exception”). The petty offense exception might forgive one CIMT if the max penalty is <=1 year and actual sentence <6 months – which can cover a one-time misdemeanor petit theft. But that’s a bandaid at best; multiple theft convictions or a single theft coupled with any other CIMT will torpedo that exception. Two CIMT convictions at any time = deportable outright. We’ve seen how a $50 shoplift can snowball into a barrier to DOJ cancellation, DACA renewals, or naturalization due to the “bad moral character” impression it creates.

Beyond the legal definitions, Florida has gotten even tougher on immigrant defendants in practice. Under the new Laken Riley Act (2025), simply being charged with theft triggers an ICE hold: ICE is alerted to detain any immigrant accused of theft or similar offenses . That means your client who was arrested for shoplifting and released on bond by the state court could be immediately picked up by ICE – often before their first court date. They miss court, a bench warrant issues, and suddenly a minor case spirals into a two-front legal battle (state and immigration) . Even if ICE doesn’t act that fast, a petit theft plea can lead to fast-track removal. We’ve had clients think “I’ll just take a quick plea, pay a fine, and be done,” only to find ICE interpreting the conviction as a green light to deport – sometimes while the ink on the plea is still drying . The bottom line: petit theft is never “petty” for non-citizens. A conviction (even with no jail) can destroy immigration prospects , labeling the person as a turpitudinous offender and potentially rendering them deportable or inadmissible for years.

Why Petit Theft Is High-Risk (Key Points):

CIMT Label: A theft conviction is a CIMT, which can bar relief and lead to removal proceedings . Even a withhold of adjudication counts as a conviction for immigration purposes (Florida “withhold” = admission + penalty) . It’s not “just a misdemeanor” – it’s a moral turpitude trigger.
ICE Holds & Detention: Florida’s coordination with ICE means a noncitizen accused of theft often faces an ICE detainer immediately. Posting bond on the criminal charge might simply transfer them to ICE custody. They risk missing state court and getting a failure-to-appear warrant – compounding legal troubles.
Deportability and Inadmissibility: One petit theft can make a recent entrant deportable , and any theft makes a person inadmissible absent the petty offense exception. Multiple thefts or theft + any other CIMT eliminate most defenses.
Collateral Damage: Beyond immediate immigration fallout, a theft record brands the client with a crime of dishonesty. This hurts future visa or citizenship applications, can be used to impeach credibility, and even non-immigration things (jobs, housing) get harder with a theft conviction hanging out there .

Given these stakes, immigration attorneys refer petit theft cases to us so we can safeguard the client’s status. Our approach is two-pronged: fight the charge in court, and mitigate immigration consequences at every step.

How Mitkevicius Law Defends Petit Theft (Immigration-Focused Strategy):

Early Intervention & ICE Hold Management: As soon as we’re hired on a theft case, we move to prevent the ICE hold from wrecking the criminal defense. We file a written plea of Not Guilty and a Motion to Waive the Client’s Appearance at arraignment and other pretrial hearings . This means if ICE has detained your client, the state court knows and we stand in for them – no FTA warrant will issue . We’ve essentially put the state case on hold or managed it in absentia until the client can return. (Florida law permits misdemeanor defendants to be tried in absentia at their request , a hugely valuable tool we leverage that many lawyers overlook.) By waiving appearance, we buy time and keep the case on track instead of it going default. (For a deeper discussion of this tactic, see our guide on pending criminal cases in ICE custody which details how we coordinate with courts and ICE.)
Aggressive Criminal Defense: We investigate the theft charge like any serious felony – because for the client, it is. Often shoplifting incidents are misunderstandings or easily overstated. We pull security camera footage, witness statements, receipts, etc., looking for reasonable doubt or constitutional violations. Was there a faulty self-checkout scanner? Racial profiling by store security? An illegal search of the client’s bag? We’ve seen it all. If the evidence is weak, we push for dismissal or acquittal – the best outcome for immigration is, of course, no conviction at all. Even a withhold or diversion, while helpful, still involves an arrest record or admission, so beating the charge outright is goal #1 whenever possible.
Negotiating Safe Outcomes: If the state’s evidence is solid, timing is critical, or the client prefers not to risk trial, we shift to damage control mode: negotiating an immigration-safe plea. Not all “lenient” deals are equal for immigrants, so we scrutinize any offer. Our priority is avoidance of a deportable conviction. For petit theft, common strategies include: negotiating a deferred prosecution agreement involving dismissal of charge in 90 days barring no other crimes, pre-trial diversion or intervention programs that result in a dismissal (and critically, do not require an upfront guilty plea) ; or amending the charge to something benign. For example, we often negotiate to reduce a theft charge to trespass (entering a store without permission) or even a local ordinance violation. Trespass in Florida is not a CIMT – it doesn’t involve intent to steal or defraud . Prosecutors are sometimes amenable to this, especially if the client has no priors – the store gets a no-return order and maybe restitution for the item, and we get a plea to trespass instead of theft. The client pays a fine or does community service, but avoids a theft conviction . And we caution clients against common pitfalls – for instance, some standard diversion programs require an admission of guilt in writing (which immigration authorities could treat as an admission of the offense even if the court withholds adjudication). We negotiate to modify those terms or choose programs that do not require a guilty plea, thereby preventing an “immigration conviction.”
Post-Resolution Follow-Through: After a successful outcome, we help your client obtain proof for immigration court or USCIS. If we got a dismissal, we make sure to have certified copies of the dismissal to show any immigration official who asks. If we got a plea to a lesser charge, we prepare clear documentation in the record of conviction about what did NOT happen – e.g. no admission of theft, just trespass – so that the record is sanitized for immigration purposes. Our goal is that when your client later faces an immigration judge or officer, the criminal disposition is either a non-event (charges dropped) or at worst a minimal offense that doesn’t trigger deportation or inadmissibility.

➡️ Related Resource: For more on our approach to theft cases, see “Petit Theft & Shoplifting Defense for Non-Citizens,” which details real-case examples of how a minor theft can become a “deportation trap” and how we’ve countered that.

Battery & Assault – When Do Florida “Crimes of Violence” Trigger Immigration Trouble?

Not every scuffle or unwanted touch will get an immigrant deported – but some will, and the line can be hazy. Florida distinguishes between simple battery (a misdemeanor) and various aggravated forms (felony battery, aggravated battery, etc.). Here we focus on the common misdemeanor battery/assault cases and their immigration effects, especially when they aren’t charged as domestic violence (we’ll tackle domestic cases in the next section).

Florida Battery Basics: Under Florida Statute §784.03, a person commits battery by “actually and intentionally touching or striking another person against their will” or by intentionally causing bodily harm . Importantly, no serious injury is required – even a non-injurious unwanted touch (a shove, a slap on the back, spitting on someone) can legally be a battery. Simple battery is a first-degree misdemeanor (up to 1 year jail) for a first offense. An “assault”, by contrast, is a threat: intentionally threatening someone with violence and causing fear (with the apparent ability to carry it out). Simple assault is a second-degree misdemeanor (up to 60 days). Many “bar fight” or minor altercation cases in Florida start as a battery charge if contact was made, or assault if it was just a threat.

Is a Battery a CIMT or Aggravated Felony? It depends on the level of violence and intent. As immigration practitioners, we know CIMTs usually involve evil intent or serious harm. Simple battery (mere offensive touching) is typically not considered a crime of moral turpitude because it lacks the element of serious harm or vileness – it’s a general intent crime that can be satisfied by very minor conduct. Courts (including BIA) have often held that simple assault or battery are not CIMTs unless there’s an aggravating factor like use of a deadly weapon or intent to inflict serious injury. Florida’s broad battery statute – which, as noted, covers any unwanted touching – supports this: the minimum conduct criminalized (e.g. tapping someone on the shoulder aggressively) is not “base or vile,” so Florida simple battery isn’t categorically a CIMT. Similarly, a misdemeanor simple battery is not an “aggravated felony” by itself. However, here’s the caution: if a sentence of 1 year is imposed on a crime of violence, it could be classified as an aggravated felony (Crime of Violence type) under INA §101(a)(43)(F) . Is a Florida battery a “crime of violence”? Federal courts have wrestled with this – because Florida battery can be committed by a mere touch, it arguably doesn’t require the level of force necessary to meet the federal definition of “violent force” (as per Johnson and Leocal line of cases). In fact, the BIA’s Matter of Sanudo and other decisions have noted that simple battery offenses that include offensive touching are not CIMTs and often not crimes of violence. So in many cases, a Florida misdemeanor battery won’t trigger the domestic violence ground (unless there’s a domestic relationship – see next section) and won’t be an aggravated felony unless prosecutors bump it up to a felony somehow or a full year sentence is given.

That said, be careful: if the battery involved intentional serious bodily harm or a weapon, prosecutors might charge it as felony battery or aggravated battery, which are more clearly CIMTs and crimes of violence. For instance, Felony Battery in Florida (784.041) occurs if great bodily harm is caused. And Aggravated Battery (784.045) involves serious injury or use of a deadly weapon. Those are felonies and almost certainly CIMTs (because of the grave harm) and aggravated felonies if a year+ sentence is imposed, due to being crimes of violence. Even a misdemeanor battery can be a CIMT if there’s evidence the defendant intended to cause significant injury (some courts do a fact-specific analysis). We’ve seen USCIS call a domestic battery with injury a CIMT in certain cases. So we treat any battery case with caution and aim to avoid any finding of intentional serious harm on the record.

Immigration Consequences: A single simple battery (non-domestic) conviction by itself is not a specific deportable offense under INA §237. It’s not listed like controlled substances or firearms or domestic violence. And as discussed, if it’s truly simple (no serious injury), it may not be a CIMT. That means, for example, an undocumented client with one simple barfight battery might not be inadmissible or deportable on that basis alone – a bit of good news. However, the situation can change if:

The client has multiple convictions – e.g. two batteries could be seen as two CIMTs if the facts involve some level of malice, which would make them deportable .
The battery was against a protected class (child abuse, etc.) or involved domestic relationship – triggers separate grounds (more on DV shortly).
The sentence was 365 days or more. Immigration authorities sometimes argue that even a withhold of adjudication with a 1-year probation counts as a “sentence to a year” (especially if any jail time was imposed, suspended or not) . A 365-day sentence on a battery that they categorize as a crime of violence could be labeled an aggravated felony (this is a worst-case scenario we strive to avoid entirely by negotiating 364-day maxima on any sentence) .

Practice Tip: Always watch the sentence length. We always push for 364 days or less on any potentially violent charge – even if it’s suspended – to fall just below the aggravated felony threshold. In Florida, judges often agree to 364-day sentences (instead of 365) if we explain the immigration impact; it costs the state nothing but means the world to the client. Florida prosecutors and judges are sometimes unaware why that one day matters – we educate them that a 365-day sentence (even on a misdemeanor battery) could permanently exile someone, whereas 364 keeps options open.

Defense Strategies for Battery/Assault Cases: When defending a noncitizen charged with a non-domestic battery or assault, our goals are: avoid a “crime of violence” label, avoid any CIMT elements, and minimize sentence exposure. Here’s how we do it:

Negotiate to Lesser Offenses: Often, we can downgrade a battery to an “affray” or disorderly conduct. Florida has an old common-law offense of affray (essentially mutual fighting in public), which is a misdemeanor. An affray involves two people fighting willingly, so it’s not a CIMT (no intent to harm an unwilling victim – it “takes two to tango”). It’s also not a listed deportable offense at all – it’s not violent in the INA sense because it doesn’t necessarily involve force against another’s will, and it’s not specifically a DV offense either. We’ve pled out bar fight cases to affray and saved clients from the domestic violence ground and CIMT issues entirely . Disorderly conduct (§877.03, breach of peace) is another catch-all downgrade we use – it covers conduct that corrupts public morals or outrages public decency, etc. A fight can often be characterized as disorderly conduct especially if alcohol was involved. Importantly, disorderly conduct is not a CIMT (it’s often just a vague offense, and simple disorderly conduct involving brawling or public intoxication is not morally turpitudinous). By pleading to disorderly, we eliminate the “violence” element – it’s no longer an assault or battery legally, just a breach of peace . We had a case where a client in a non-domestic fight was originally charged with battery; we convinced the prosecutor to let him plead to disorderly conduct on the theory that it was a mutual drunken altercation. Result: small fine, no “violent crime” on record, and no immigration flag (the client later naturalized with no issues from that incident).
Keep the Record Clean of Aggravating Details: If a plea to a battery is unavoidable, we take great care in the factual basis and charging language. Remember, immigration will look at the record of conviction (charging document, plea colloquy, judgment). We avoid any mention of a domestic relationship, serious injuries, or weapons unless absolutely necessary for the plea. For example, if the charge is generic “battery” and the victim happened to get a bruise, we don’t stipulate “caused injury” in the plea – we’d just say “defendant intentionally touched the victim against her will” and omit detail. That way, there’s no clear finding of “bodily harm” which could raise CIMT concerns. We want the record to reflect at worst a minimal battery. (If it was a plea to assault, we likewise wouldn’t mention if the victim was a spouse or anything – more on that in DV section). Tailoring the record can be crucial; as you know, immigration authorities are generally limited to the record of conviction – they can’t assume worse facts than are in the record. We use that to our advantage by sanitizing that record.
Self-Defense and Withholds: Sometimes the best strategy is to prepare a strong self-defense case and leverage it for a withhold of adjudication (no formal conviction). We had a client who got into a minor altercation but had a plausible self-defense claim. We showed the prosecutor some exculpatory evidence (texts from the “victim” provoked the fight). The state agreed to a pre-trial diversion contract. Our client did an anger management course, and the charge was dismissed. No plea, thus no conviction for immigration purposes.

Key point: Our overriding mission in assault/battery cases is to avoid triggering INA §237(a)(2)(E) (crime of domestic violence) if it’s not a domestic case, and avoid the CIMT/aggravated felony traps. By pleading to alternate charges or carefully crafting plea terms, we usually succeed. As an immigration attorney, you then won’t have a client with a “violent crime” conviction on their record – making your job of keeping them here far easier.

Domestic Violence Charges – Navigating the Double Danger (Criminal & Immigration)

Domestic violence cases are where criminal and immigration law most pointedly collide. A conviction for a “crime of domestic violence” is specifically listed as a deportable offense in INA §237 , and it carries other immigration bars (e.g. for relief). Florida treats domestic incidents seriously as well – there are special units, mandatory jail terms, etc. For noncitizen defendants, a domestic charge is a double danger: the state penalties are harsh, and the immigration consequences can be life-altering.

What Counts as “Domestic Violence” for Immigration: Under INA §237(a)(2)(E), any conviction of a crime of domestic violence can make a noncitizen deportable . A “crime of domestic violence” means an offense that is a crime of violence (as defined in 18 U.S.C. §16) committed against a person with whom the defendant has a specified domestic relationship (spouse, former spouse, co-parent, cohabitant, etc.) . So two components: (1) the offense must involve use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force (or certain forcible felonies), and (2) the relationship must be one of those listed. In practice, the typical scenario is battery (or assault) on a spouse/intimate partner. Also note, stalking, child abuse, or child neglect convictions are separately listed in the same section – those too cause deportability . Additionally, violation of a protection order related to domestic violence (even without a criminal conviction) is its own deportable category .

Florida Domestic Violence Charges: Florida does not have a standalone statute called “domestic violence battery” – instead, it’s the normal statutes (battery, assault, etc.) with a domestic label. For example, “Domestic Battery” in Florida is usually charged as battery under §784.03, but the arrest or court records note the domestic relationship (often leading to specific conditions like no-contact orders, etc.). Florida also has a specific felony offense of “Domestic Battery by Strangulation” (§784.041(2)(a)) and Aggravated Battery (Domestic) if a deadly weapon or serious harm in a domestic context. Many first-offense domestic violence cases in Florida are misdemeanor battery (first-degree misd., up to 1 year) with the domestic tag. Florida law imposes some extra requirements: a minimum of 5 days jail on any domestic battery conviction, unless the judge states why not, and mandatory 26-week Batterer’s Intervention Program. Also, a domestic violence conviction (even withhold) cannot be sealed or expunged under Florida law – it stays on the record for life. So the stakes are high even on the state side.

Immigration Consequences of DV Convictions: For any client who is an LPR, asylee, student visa holder, DACA recipient, or otherwise has legal status, a single domestic violence conviction after admission makes them deportable. There’s no “petty offense exception” for the DV ground – even a misdemeanor with no injury qualifies, as long as the elements meet a crime of violence and the relationship. It also bars relief like cancellation of removal for non-LPRs (cancellation for non-LPR is not available to someone who has an offense under the domestic violence deportation ground). It can even interfere with VAWA self-petitions (since a self-petitioner can be disqualified for a DV conviction themselves). And for those without status, a DV conviction will typically render them inadmissible for having a CIMT (because most DV-type assaults/batteries do involve moral turpitude, as intentional violence against a person can be considered morally turpitudinous, especially when it’s a loved one). All in all, a DV conviction is a fast-track to deportation unless some defense applies.

However – and this is crucial – not every Florida case labeled “domestic” will neatly fit the federal removal ground. The relationship part is usually clear (spouse, etc.), but the “crime of violence” part can be contested. As we discussed, Florida’s simple battery can be satisfied by a touch. The question has arisen in immigration courts: Is Florida battery a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. §16? If the least act criminalized (a mere unwanted touch) doesn’t involve violent force, arguably it is not. In fact, the 11th Circuit in Troche (and other circuits for similar state laws) acknowledged that a battery statute encompassing de minimis force might not categorically be a crime of violence. The BIA’s Matter of Velasquez (2018) also held that some state DV battery statutes were not crimes of violence because of how minimal the force could be. This means a skilled immigration attorney could fight the deportation charge by arguing the conviction doesn’t trigger the DV ground. But – that’s a fight we’d rather avoid needing to have. It requires litigating in immigration court, potentially appealing, while the client sits detained. Our philosophy is, if we can prevent the conviction or alter it such that DHS never even charges the client under the DV removal ground, that’s far better.

Our Defense Approach in DV Cases: We approach domestic cases very delicately. We know these involve heightened emotions, often conflicting stories, and sometimes reluctant victims. Our objectives are: (1) avoid a conviction entirely (through dismissal or diversion), or (2) if a conviction is likely, plead to a non-deportable offense if at all possible. Here are strategies we use:

Intensive Pre-Trial Work: We investigate the domestic incident thoroughly – not only the facts but also the dynamics. It’s common for alleged victims in these cases to later recant or at least desire not to press charges. While the state can still prosecute without the victim (and often do, using 911 tapes or police testimony) , a reluctant victim can sometimes be an ally. We ensure any recantations or favorable info (affidavits from the partner, etc.) are documented. We look for due process issues: was the client read Miranda in their language? Are there any injuries that are inconsistent with the victim’s initial claims (which could indicate exaggeration)? In some cases, we’ve shown the prosecutor evidence from social media or texts that suggest the incident wasn’t as one-sided as police thought. Our goal is to either get the charge dropped or reduced. Sometimes, we can convince prosecutors to drop a case if the victim affirmatively does not want to cooperate and we show them they have an uphill battle at trial (e.g., no independent witnesses, victim will testify for the defense, etc.). Even if not a full drop, this leverage can get us a reduction to a lesser charge.
Charge Bargaining – Remove the “Domestic” Element: A key tactic in plea negotiations is to plead to an offense that doesn’t include the domestic relationship as an element. For example, instead of “Domestic Battery,” we might plead to simple battery against an unspecified victim (or even a specific person but not acknowledge relationship). Florida prosecutors sometimes allow a plea to just “battery” with no admission of the domestic relationship, especially if the case is borderline or the victim is uncooperative. Why? Because for state purposes, it’s the same level of offense. The only difference is the label. If we succeed, then on the record of conviction there’s no indication the victim was a spouse or similar – which means ICE can’t easily prove the “domestic” part of the DV deportation ground. The client might still be deportable as a CIMT if the battery involved injury, but we’ve at least removed the per se DV label (which also can preserve cancellation relief eligibility in some cases). Better yet, as mentioned earlier, plead down to disorderly conduct – a generic offense that doesn’t imply violence against a person at all . We’ve used this strategy: e.g., a client charged with domestic battery for a fight with her husband – we negotiated a plea to disorderly conduct (affray could work too). The narrative: it was a mutual shouting match that disturbed the neighbors’ peace. Result: no specified victim harm, no DV conviction, client avoided the DV deportation charge and is only potentially inadmissible for a CIMT if at all (and disorderly conduct typically isn’t even CIMT).
Diversion and Counseling: Many Florida jurisdictions have pre-trial diversion programs for first-time domestic violence offenders, often involving counseling, anger management, etc. These programs can be tricky – some require an admission of guilt or have conditions that themselves might trigger immigration scrutiny (e.g., a program where the defendant has to write a letter apologizing and admitting harm – that letter could be considered an admission of the criminal act). We carefully vet these. If a diversion does not require a plea or admission, it’s ideal: the client completes classes, and the charge is dismissed, leaving no conviction . We had success in a case where a young client with no prior record was charged with domestic battery after a minor incident with his girlfriend. We got him into a deferred prosecution agreement; he took a 12-week anger management course (less intense than BIP), did some community service, and the state dropped the case. Immigration-wise, no conviction, no CIMT – it’s like it never happened (though the arrest still exists, it’s far easier to explain an arrest that resulted in no charges).
Minimize and Explain on the Record: When a plea is unavoidable, we make the record work for future immigration arguments. For instance, if pleading to a misdemeanor domestic battery, we might have the plea colloquy avoid stating the relationship outright (“Victim Jane Doe” rather than “wife Jane Doe”) – albeit the relationship might be evident from context, every little bit helps. We also emphasize in sentencing any mitigating factors: e.g., the judge might state that this was “very minor” or “situational” or that the defendant has no violent history. While immigration tribunals aren’t interested in sympathy, such statements don’t hurt if later applying for discretion (like Cancellation or VAWA relief). And remember, we absolutely keep the sentence to 364 days or less if there’s any jail or probation term, to avoid the aggravated felony problem .

Protective Order Violations: A quick word on injunctions: Many times, alongside a criminal DV case, the alleged victim obtains a civil restraining order. Violating a DV protective order – even a civil one – can make a client deportable even if the underlying battery is not proven . The standard is that a court finds the person engaged in conduct that violated the order (like contacting the protected person when the order said no contact). This doesn’t require a criminal conviction; a civil contempt finding is enough. So we counsel our clients strictly: do not call or text the partner, do not violate the no-contact order in place. If a client already has a violation charge (say they tried to apologize in violation of a no-contact), we often handle that alongside. Our priority is to resolve any such charge without a conviction – e.g., sometimes those can be pleaded to a technical probation violation or something that doesn’t explicitly say the person threatened or harassed the victim, thereby avoiding the deportation trigger. It’s a nuanced area, but worth noting: violation of DV injunction is a deportable offense on its own , so it must be treated with the same seriousness.

In summary, domestic violence charges require special care. We pride ourselves on finding creative solutions that keep a DV off our noncitizen client’s record if humanly possible – whether by down-charging to a non-DV offense, diversion, or outright defense victory. We work closely with immigration counsel in these cases because sometimes an immigration attorney can use a withholding of removal under VAWA or other remedies if we can at least get the criminal side stable. But a clean result (no DV conviction) is always the goal.

➡️ Related: For more detail on Florida’s domestic violence laws and our defense tactics, see “Domestic Violence Defense for Non-Citizens in Florida.” It explains the state court process and the immigrant-specific stakes in DV cases.

Drug Offenses (Marijuana & Other Controlled Substances) – One Joint Can Equal Deportation

Drug cases are perhaps the most unforgiving in immigration law. Any conviction for a controlled substance offense – even the tiniest amount – can make a noncitizen deportable and inadmissible (the only exception being one single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana for personal use, which protects against deportability but not inadmissibility). Immigration attorneys are well aware of the nightmare: a client with a minor marijuana or prescription pill case that pleads guilty might be placing themselves on a one-way path out of the country, with virtually no waivers available in most cases. Florida’s drug laws add some wrinkles (like a broader definition of cannabis or certain substances not on the federal schedule), but generally, a conviction under Florida Statutes Chapter 893 (Drug Abuse Prevention and Control) will be treated as a controlled substance conviction under federal immigration law – a deportable offense .

Common Misdemeanor Drug Charges: The most common we see are simple possession of marijuana (under 20 grams, a first-degree misdemeanor in Florida) and sometimes possession of drug paraphernalia (also a first-degree misdemeanor). Florida did legalize hemp and low-THC CBD, which created some evidentiary issues for pot cases, but by and large, noncitizens still get arrested for a baggie of weed or a pipe. Even a misdemeanor marijuana conviction will render someone deportable (INA §237(a)(2)(B)) and inadmissible (INA §212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II)) – with one caveat: The law says a single offense of possession of <=30g of marijuana does not make an LPR or other admitted person deportable. However, that same offense does make the person inadmissible (the inadmissibility statute has no such 30g exception) . So the 30g exception is a narrow shield – it might save a permanent resident from being put in removal proceedings for one small marijuana conviction, but if that LPR then travels abroad, they could be denied re-entry for having a drug conviction (unless they get a waiver). It also doesn’t help someone trying to get a green card – any drug conviction (aside from that very narrow exception possibly being argued in a 212(h) waiver context) is a showstopper for admissibility. And note: any other controlled substance (cocaine, heroin, meth, unauthorized pills, etc.) – no quantity exception. One Xanax without a prescription = deportable, inadmissible.

Immigration Consequences: Mandatory detention is a big issue – any drug conviction (except one marijuana <30g) subjects clients to mandatory ICE detention during removal proceedings. Also, aggravated felony applies if it’s an illicit drug trafficking offense – usually that means distribution/sale felonies, but note: if a noncitizen has two or more possession convictions, the government might charge that as an aggravated felony (they sometimes attempt to equate it to “illicit trafficking” under recidivist theory, though this is legally contentious after Lopez v. Gonzales). Generally, a single simple possession is not an aggravated felony, but it’s enough to bar most forms of relief: no Cancellation of Removal for non-LPRs (drug offense is disqualifying except the <30g marijuana scenario), cancellation for LPRs is off the table if it’s a drug conviction (they must also show 7 years good moral character, which a drug conviction impedes), asylum is barred if it’s considered a “particularly serious crime” (most simple drug possessions are not PSCs unless they’re classified as drug trafficking with a sentence over 5 years, but still, the client likely will have been removed by then). Voluntary departure is about the only thing a drug client can sometimes do once convicted – unless we can vacate the conviction or qualify them for a very limited waiver (the 212(h) waiver is available for a single offense of simple possession of marijuana <=30g for admissibility, if they have a U.S. citizen family with extreme hardship – but that doesn’t help deportability once they’re here). In short, a drug conviction is often an immigration death sentence for any hopes of legal status. Even a withhold of adjudication in Florida counts as a conviction, so there is no safe harbor unless we get no conviction at all (i.e., charges dropped or some kind of deferred prosecution that doesn’t require a guilty plea).

Our Strategy – Avoid Conviction, Period: In drug cases, the #1 goal is avoid an immigration-countable conviction.

Pre-trial diversion (PTI) is usually the best path, because in much of Florida felony PTI is a true “contract-and-dismissal” program—no plea is entered, the defendant completes counseling, testing, or community service, and the State files a nolle prosequi. Without a guilty-or-no-contest plea and without a finding of guilt, there is no “conviction” under INA § 101(a)(48)(A), so immigration consequences are avoided.

But PTI is not uniform statewide. In several circuits—including the First Judicial Circuit (Escambia, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, Walton)—prosecutors require the defendant to enter a deferred plea of guilty or no contest before beginning PTI. If the program is completed, the plea is withdrawn and the case dismissed; if not, judgment is entered on the plea. Because that initial plea already meets the federal definition of a conviction, even a successful dismissal can still count against the client for immigration purposes.

When diversion isn’t an option (e.g., client has prior offenses, or the prosecutor/judge won’t offer it), we switch to damage control via plea bargaining:

Charge Bargaining: We look for an alternative charge that is not explicitly a controlled substance offense under immigration law. One common tactic: plead to drug paraphernalia (Fla. Stat. §893.147) instead of possession of the drug . This is imperfect, but often better. Here’s why: Immigration law punishes convictions for any law “relating to a controlled substance.” Arguably, paraphernalia (like possessing a pipe) “relates to” drugs, so it can still be a deportable offense. However, there have been cases and arguments made that if the record of conviction for a paraphernalia offense does not specify the controlled substance involved, the government might not be able to prove it was a controlled substance offense (especially if the state paraphernalia statute could cover things like tobacco pipes, etc.). It’s a nuanced argument, but some immigration lawyers have successfully contended that a generic paraphernalia conviction isn’t a deportable CS offense if the substance isn’t identified . At the very least, paraphernalia is a lesser stigma than possession of cocaine, for example – sometimes that can help with discretionary calls. We exploit this by, when possible, not specifying the drug in the plea. E.g., the plea for paraphernalia might just say “defendant possessed a pipe/device to inhale a substance” without saying marijuana. If the arrest was for marijuana, some judges will allow that generic plea. It leaves an ambiguity that sometimes can be used in immigration court to argue the substance might have been something not federally controlled (Florida’s paraphernalia statute doesn’t require the substance be illegal – theoretically one could use a pipe for tobacco). This can be a tough sell, but it’s a tool in the box.
Keep it Small & Vague: If a client absolutely must plead to possession, we aim to keep the quantity below 30g for marijuana (to retain eligibility for the 212(h) waiver or the deportation exception) . That’s usually not hard – if it was a personal use case, it’s likely under 30g anyway (30g is about an ounce). We also try to avoid any aggravating factors: e.g., if originally charged with possession with intent to sell (a felony), we might negotiate down to simple possession (misdemeanor) to avoid the trafficking/aggravated felony label. And crucially, we minimize the sentence: often for a first offense drug possession plea (if not diverted), we can get a withhold of adjudication and credit time served (like 1-2 days) or just probation. We ensure no sentence of incarceration beyond 180 days if it’s a CIMT concern, but more importantly for drugs, we ensure no weird probation terms that equal confinement. (Immigration doesn’t count probation as a “term of imprisonment,” so probation length isn’t an issue for AF – the conviction itself is the issue. However, a very long probation could be seen as restraint on liberty, though generally not counted like jail .) The main thing is to close the case in a way that, if the client later can seek relief, the immigration court sees a minor disposition (e.g. “adjudication withheld, 6 months probation” – though it’s still a conviction, it looks better than adjudicated guilty + jail).

Finally, if a client already has a drug conviction when they come to us (say an immigration lawyer refers them for post-conviction relief to try to vacate a plea that wasn’t Padilla-compliant), we handle that too. That goes beyond this guide, but know that we can file motions to vacate convictions (ineffective assistance via Padilla, etc.) if there’s a legal basis.

In summary: One drug conviction can ruin a noncitizen’s life in the U.S. We treat any client with a drug charge as a ticking time bomb for their immigration status. Our approach is to diffuse that bomb through diversion or creative pleas that avoid a conviction or at least mitigate its immigration effect. We work hand-in-hand with you, the immigration attorney, to understand the client’s status and goals (cancellation, DACA, etc.), so we know what outcomes are absolute no-gos. If you tell us “This client could adjust status through a U.S. citizen spouse if they don’t have a drug conviction,” then we know nothing short of a dismissal is acceptable. We will fight tooth and nail for that dismissal or amendment. And if you tell us “The client already has TPS, one drug conviction will kill it” – again, we know the stakes. This close collaboration ensures the criminal case outcome positions the client for the best possible result in the immigration system.

Other Offenses to Watch: Firearms, Fraud, and Driving Offenses

We’ve covered the big four areas the question highlighted, but as immigration attorneys, you know virtually any crime can have immigration consequences. Here are a few additional Florida offenses that often intersect with immigration concerns:

Firearms Offenses: Any conviction for violating a law related to firearms or destructive devices makes a noncitizen deportable. This is an often overlooked ground. In Florida, common firearm charges include carrying a concealed firearm without a permit, felon in possession, etc. Even a misdemeanor like open carrying of a firearm (a second-degree misd.) or improper exhibition of a firearm can trigger the firearm deportation ground. We handle these by, if possible, pleading down to a non-firearm offense (e.g., “disorderly conduct” if someone waved a gun, or “carrying a concealed weapon” (knife/other weapon) instead of a firearm). The distinction is key: a conviction for carrying a concealed weapon (brass knuckles, knife, etc.) is not the firearm deportation ground, whereas “firearm” explicitly is . Sometimes merely removing the word “firearm” from the conviction (have the client plea to a lesser charge that says “weapon”) can save them from deportation. We also check if the firearm was antique – an antique firearm under federal law isn’t considered a firearm for INA purposes, so if it was a muzzleloader or such, we highlight that. But generally, if your client is charged in Florida with any gun-related offense, refer them out (we’re happy to help) – it must be handled in a way to avoid that deportation ground.
Fraud and Theft (CIMTs involving fraud): We touched on theft; fraud is similar or worse. Any offense involving fraud or deceit is usually a CIMT. If the loss to the victim exceeds $10,000, it becomes an aggravated felony (fraud) under INA 101(a)(43)(M) – which bars almost all relief . For example, a conviction for welfare fraud, bank fraud, or even passing bad checks can fall into this. Many fraud offenses are felonies, but even misdemeanors (like petit theft by fraud or misdemeanor tax fraud) can have big effects. Our strategy is to keep any loss amount below $10k in the record (to avoid AF), and ideally below $1,000 to avoid felony thresholds that make it worse. Sometimes pleading to a non-fraud offense (like if someone was charged with food stamp fraud, maybe plea to “theft” (still CIMT but not tagged as fraud – arguably better for certain waivers)). We also look at civil compromise or paying restitution pre-plea to get charges dropped in minor fraud cases, to get no conviction at all. The main takeaway: if it smells like fraud, it’s a CIMT. And multiple CIMTs or one CIMT within 5 years of entry (with possible 1-year sentence) cause deportability. So everything we discussed for theft CIMTs applies to fraud too. We included this category just so you as immigration counsel keep an eye out – refer those clients for specialized criminal handling as well.
Driving Offenses: These often come up: DUI (driving under the influence) and Driving Without a License (DWLS). The good news: a first-time simple DUI in Florida is not a deportable offense by itself – it’s not a CIMT (since no intent to harm, it’s negligence at worst) and not an aggravated felony unless it involves injury. However, DUI can have indirect effects: for instance, a DUI is considered a “significant misdemeanor” for DACA, which could revoke a DREAMer’s DACA status. Multiple DUIs can affect the good moral character finding for naturalization or cancellation. Also, DHS has sometimes tried to detain and deport individuals with multiple DUIs under the theory they pose a public safety risk, even if DUI isn’t a specified ground – or they’ll use something like a “crime involving alcohol abuse” to try to deny discretionary relief. And if a DUI involves an accident with injury, it can be charged as a felony (DUI with serious bodily injury), which the BIA has said can be an aggravated felony as a “crime of violence” if a 1-year sentence is imposed . So while a basic DUI isn’t automatically a removal ground, it’s a serious priority for ICE and can cause eligibility issues. We defend DUIs with an eye toward immigration too – e.g., avoid any plea to DUI with injury, try to get a “wet reckless” (reckless driving) plea instead, since reckless driving (without injury) is not usually a CIMT (it’s a vague reckless conduct offense) and not specifically a ground of removal. Driving on a suspended license or no valid license: Those offenses (Fla. Stat. 322.34) are generally not CIMTs – they are regulatory, no moral turpitude (as confirmed by case law: driving without a license is not a CIMT ). They also aren’t grounds of deportation. However, we flag them because they often lead to ICE encounters (a simple traffic stop for no license can get an undocumented person referred to ICE). Additionally, multiple convictions (even for minor offenses) can accumulate and paint a “bad character” picture. We often try to convert a DWLS into a civil infraction (like failure to carry license) or get it dismissed to keep the record clean. While one conviction won’t trigger removal, the client may ask you, the immigration lawyer, “Does this matter?” and you’d want to assure them it’s not a direct ground – but also refer them to us to handle it in a way that maybe avoids a conviction entirely (we do that routinely by fixing their license and getting the case dropped).
Violations of Probation & Other “Technical” Offenses: Sometimes clients violate probation (missing appointments, etc.) or get cited for contempt of court. These typically inherit the character of the underlying offense (a VOP isn’t a new crime, it’s continuing the old one’s consequences). But a willful failure to appear that becomes a separate charge can be a problem (e.g., skipping out on bail can be a CIMT if it involves intent to evade court). We advise clients carefully to avoid picking up any new charges while on probation, and we work to resolve VOPs without adjudications if possible.

In all these “other” scenarios, the unifying theme is: we tailor our defense to avoid triggering removal grounds and to preserve your client’s eligibility for immigration relief. We often consult with our clients’ immigration attorneys (and encourage you to reach out to us anytime) to double-check that our plan aligns with the immigration strategy. For instance, if a client is in the process of adjusting status through marriage, we know any conviction could delay things – so we might push extra hard for a withhold or diversion even on a minor charge, so the client can answer “no conviction” in their immigration paperwork (with explanation of the arrest). If a client has asylum pending, we avoid any concession that could be seen as a “particularly serious crime.”

Now that we’ve reviewed offense-specific issues, let’s talk about what sets our firm apart – and why most criminal defense attorneys do not adequately protect noncitizen clients (and how we fill that gap).

The Padilla Gap – Why Most Criminal Defense Attorneys Aren’t Equipped for “Crimmigration”

It’s 2025, and one would hope that every criminal defense lawyer knows to consider immigration consequences – after all, the Supreme Court’s landmark Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) made it a 6th Amendment duty to advise noncitizen defendants of the risk of deportation before pleading guilty . Unfortunately, the reality has not caught up with the ideal. Padilla’s promise often goes unfulfilled . Many well-intentioned criminal defense attorneys lack the time or expertise to truly understand immigration law, which is often called “second only to the tax code in complexity.” As Justice Alito noted in Padilla, expecting every defense lawyer to master immigration law is “unrealistic… [they] very often do not possess – expertise in [that] area of the law.” . The Court imposed the duty but provided no funding or training; public defenders especially are juggling huge caseloads and can’t always navigate the “maze of hyper-technical statutes and regulations” that make up immigration law .

The result? Noncitizen defendants all too frequently receive inadequate or incorrect advice about the immigration consequences of their case. Common failures we see include:

Dismissiveness of Misdemeanors: Many defense attorneys assume “it’s just a misdemeanor, you’ll be fine.” They might plead a client out quickly to a small theft or minor drug charge, thinking they did well to avoid jail, not realizing that conviction is a one-way ticket to deportation. For example, a public defender might get a first-time offender “time served” on a marijuana possession and think that’s a win, but we know that any drug conviction (other than one tiny marijuana) absolutely devastates immigration status. The client finds out later when ICE detains them – a disaster that could have been avoided with the right approach.
Misunderstanding of Withholds & Diversions: Florida attorneys often love withholds of adjudication because it lets a client say “I wasn’t convicted” on job applications. But many don’t realize a withhold is still a conviction under immigration law . We’ve had clients come to us for post-conviction relief who pled guilty on bad advice that a withhold would protect them – only to be placed in removal because, under INA §101(a)(48), that was indeed a conviction. Similarly, some attorneys don’t utilize pre-trial diversion when available, or they structure it poorly (e.g., having the client allocute as part of diversion, creating an admission). These nuances are often missed.
Sentence Length Oversights: A classic example: a defendant gets a 12-month probation sentence for a misdemeanor. The defense attorney is happy – no jail time! But 12 months (365 days) on the judgment could be treated as a 1-year “term of imprisonment,” potentially triggering the CIMT deportability clause (if within 5 years of entry) or even being an aggravated felony if the offense was a crime of violence . All because of one extra day. Many lawyers don’t know to push for 364-day sentences . We always do, as a standard practice.
Lack of Creative Plea Bargaining: Most criminal lawyers are focused on immediate outcomes (reduced charges, less jail) and may not think to ask for a different charge entirely for immigration reasons. For instance, pleading to trespass instead of theft, or to accessory after the fact instead of drug sales , or to solicitation instead of a completed crime – these are very specialized negotiations we undertake. A typical attorney might never propose that because, to them, a conviction is a conviction as long as it’s a misdemeanor. They don’t realize that what the conviction is called (and the statute it’s under) can make the difference between deportable and not deportable. We’ve had prosecutors raise an eyebrow when we ask for an odd substitution (like “How about my client pleads to accessory after the fact to the drug sale, instead of the sale itself?”). That’s not a request they get every day. But those who understand immigration consequences appreciate why – an accessory-after-the-fact to a drug felony, especially if we keep sentence under a year, might avoid the “drug trafficking aggravated felony” category , giving the client a fighting chance in immigration court.
Failure to Advise or Document Advice: Some lawyers, frankly, still don’t ask about immigration status at all – a clear Padilla violation. Or they mention it in passing (“This might affect you if you’re not a citizen”) but don’t investigate further. We thoroughly screen clients (citizen or not – sometimes they think they’re U.S. citizens but aren’t derivative citizens, etc.) and if they’re noncitizen, we pause and strategize with immigration consequences front and center. Many attorneys unfortunately treat Padilla as a box to check (having the client sign a standard “I understand I could be deported” form) rather than a call to arms to mitigate those consequences. Our philosophy aligns with Padilla’s core: “[p]reserving the client’s right to remain in the United States may be more important to the client than any potential jail sentence.” . We take that to heart. Many attorneys still effectively prioritize the criminal outcome over the immigration outcome, not realizing the latter is often far more severe for the client.
Limited Knowledge of Immigration Law Nuances: Immigration law changes constantly – case law, policies, and categories evolve. A criminal attorney not immersed in this might not know, for example, that in 2021 the 11th Circuit (Said v. U.S. A.G.) clarified that any drug conviction (even a tiny amount) has no inadmissibility exception except the specific 30g marijuana one . Or they might not know about the BIA’s 2016 ruling expanding CIMTs to temporary takings in theft . We stay updated on these developments (we regularly review practice advisories, AILA notes, and even contribute to networks discussing crimmigration issues). Frankly, most criminal defenders do not, which is understandable – it’s like asking an immigration attorney to keep up with the latest in DUI breathalyzer litigation. Each field is deep.

How We Fill the Gap: Mitkevicius Law was literally founded on the mission of bridging criminal and immigration law. We consider ourselves part of a growing group of “crimmigration” attorneys who see the full picture. Here’s what we bring to the table for you and your clients:

Expertise & Ongoing Training: We have dedicated significant time to studying immigration law as it relates to crimes. We’ve presented at trainings (including a 2024 Criminal Law Symposium on representing immigrants in criminal court) . We stay in close contact with immigration lawyers (formal partnerships and informal mentorships) to keep our knowledge current. This is not a side interest for us – it’s core to our practice. When you refer a case, you can trust that we’re considering not just the immediate criminal charge, but the client’s entire immigration history and future. We often ask you for details like entry date, status, prior convictions, etc., because those affect strategy (e.g., 5-year CIMT clock, eligibility for relief, etc.) .
Holistic Case Strategy from Day 1: From the moment we open a case file for a noncitizen, we flag it and apply a special protocol (much of which we’ve described above): early steps to prevent ICE detention (like filing waiver of appearance motions and notifying ICE if needed to schedule resolution), analyzing the statute and subsection to see if it’s divisible or can be construed in a safe way , and mapping out a defense plan that aligns with immigration goals. We essentially do a mini “immigration consequences consultation” for every criminal case – similar to what you would do, but on our end – to ensure we’re not stepping on any immigration landmines. This is exactly the structured approach outlined in our internal “Quick Guide to Immigration Consequences of Charges” which we use to train our team . We determine: Is this offense a deportable offense or inadmissible offense? CIMT? Controlled substance? Aggravated felony? . That analysis then informs every decision in the criminal case (plea or fight, what to negotiate for, etc.). Most criminal attorneys do not perform such an analysis – we do, and we document it.
Creative Plea Negotiation & Strong Relationships: We have built a reputation in our area for being the attorneys who come up with “outside the box” resolutions to save immigration status. At first, some prosecutors were puzzled by our requests, but over time, many have come to understand our reasoning and even respect it. We’ve had prosecutors agree to charge reductions or weird plea arrangements specifically because they realize it’s important to avoid ruining someone’s life over a minor crime. Not every prosecutor will accommodate, but we often find a sympathetic ear when we explain the stakes. Our relationships with local prosecutors and judges, built on trust and professionalism, mean we can often have candid off-the-record discussions: “Can’t we find a way to resolve this that avoids this young man’s deportation? He’ll still take responsibility and punishment, but maybe under a different label.” Those conversations can lead to solutions that a more timid or unaware attorney would never discover.
Collaboration with Immigration Counsel: We encourage you, as the immigration lawyer, to be as involved as you want to be (while respecting privilege and client wishes). Some immigration attorneys prefer to stay in the loop and even provide us with cheat-sheets on what consequences to avoid (we love that!). Others hand the client over and trust us with the criminal side entirely. Either way, we keep lines of communication open. We might shoot you an email: “Hey, we can get charge X instead of Y – would that help your case?” or “Client is considering pleading to Z, here’s what that means for INA §212/237 – do you agree it’s safe?” This teamwork approach ensures no stone is left unturned. It’s sadly common that immigration and criminal attorneys operate in silos and the client falls through the cracks in between. Our firm’s ethos is the opposite – we serve as a bridge. In fact, we have a network (the Florida Non-Citizen Defense Network) where we share knowledge with other criminal-defense-with-immigration-focus attorneys and coordinate with immigration lawyers statewide .
Compliance and Ethics in Advertising: We are careful never to promise outcomes we can’t guarantee, especially in immigration-related matters. Clients have been burned by “consultants” promising them everything. We emphasize that while we fight aggressively for dismissals or safe pleas, outcomes depend on facts and law. We always make sure the client (and you) understand the possible immigration consequences that could still flow – we don’t sugarcoat. This honest approach actually makes us more credible when negotiating with prosecutors too – they know we’re not concocting fake concerns; the risks we highlight are real, and we have the case citations to back them up if needed.

Ultimately, our goal aligns with yours: to protect the client’s ability to remain in the U.S. without compromising their defense in criminal court. It’s a delicate balancing act, but this is all we do. We’re proud to be the resource that immigration attorneys across Florida can turn to when their client lands in criminal trouble. Think of us as an extension of your team, handling the criminal side with the immigration perspective always in focus. As one Jacksonville attorney put it, we strive to be “the lawyer lawyers hire” for these hybrid cases .

Partnering with Mitkevicius Law – Helping You Help Your Clients

When an immigration client’s phone call turns into a frantic plea “I’ve been arrested!”, the stakes couldn’t be higher. We understand that as an immigration attorney, your expertise is immigration law, and while you may know the basics of crimmigration, you shouldn’t have to navigate the criminal court’s intricacies. By partnering with Mitkevicius Law, PLLC, you gain a dedicated criminal defense ally who speaks your language (legally speaking) and will fight for your client as relentlessly as you would.

What we offer in a partnership with you:

Free Consultations & Immediate Action: Time is critical in these cases – especially if the client is in ICE custody or has upcoming court dates. We offer free immediate consultations to you and the client. If you call us about a client arrested anywhere in Florida, we’ll promptly assess the situation. Often, we can be hired and taking action within 24–48 hours . For example, filing that waiver of appearance and notice to the court that the defendant is in ICE custody – preventing a bench warrant . This rapid response can literally save the client from becoming a fugitive or losing bond.
Statewide Reach for Immigration Attorneys: While our office is in Pensacola, we handle cases across Florida (either directly or through local counsel relationships for far jurisdictions). We know immigration attorneys have clients all over the state, and Florida’s large immigrant communities in Miami, Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville, etc., all face these issues. We make it easy for you to refer a case to us and trust that it will be managed properly. Modern technology lets us file motions and attend hearings remotely in many cases (especially post-COVID). And if travel is needed, we do it. We want you to feel you have a “go-to” criminal ally anywhere in Florida.
Regular Updates and Collaboration: We keep referring attorneys in the loop (with client permission, of course). You won’t be left wondering what happened at the last hearing – we’ll inform you. Did the client get into diversion? You’ll know. Is a plea on the table? We might seek your input on whether the plea terms jeopardize relief. This way, when you step into immigration court or prepare an application, there are no surprises. We can also provide letters or affidavits explaining the criminal disposition in plain terms for USCIS or IJ’s, if that helps (e.g., a letter to a USCIS officer explaining that a withhold of adjudication in Florida still entails a judicial finding but no formal conviction, etc., to preempt confusion).
Internal References and Resources: Throughout our website (Pensacola.Lawyer) we have resources not just for clients but for attorneys – quick guides, checklists, etc. Feel free to use them. For instance, our “Immigration Consequences of Charges – Quick Guide” can be a handy reference if you’re evaluating a criminal record yourself . And our “Negotiating Immigration-Safe Plea Agreements” article goes into the nitty-gritty of plea strategy we summarized here . These can give you additional confidence that the strategies we employ are well-thought-out and research-backed.
Ethical, Client-Centered Representation: We adhere strictly to legal ethics and Florida Bar rules, particularly important in joint representations. We won’t overstep into your immigration case (unless you want our input or co-counsel). Our retainer agreements clearly outline our scope (criminal matters only, unless separately agreed). We also respect your client relationship – we’re not here to take over your client, but to bolster their defense in our arena. In fact, by saving the client from a conviction, we ideally hand them back to you in the best possible position to move forward with their immigration matter. And we never make false promises like “hire us and you definitely won’t be deported” – we promise to use every legal tool to try to prevent that, and we explain the contingency plans if things go wrong.
Proven Track Record: While every case is unique, we are proud of our results: charges reduced or dismissed in a high percentage of our noncitizen cases, many clients who were on the brink of deportation but, through our efforts, got a second chance. We have testimonials from both clients and fellow attorneys attesting to our relentless advocacy and creative solutions. (We’re happy to share references if you’d like to speak to an attorney who has worked with us before.)

WHY A TRIAL POSTURE PROTECTS IMMIGRANTS

Too many non-citizen defendants lose their status because counsel feared the courtroom. When diversion isn’t available and plea alternatives still trigger deportation, a well-prepared jury trial can be the last—and sometimes only—road to an immigration-safe result. Even setting a firm trial date can tip negotiations: faced with our readiness to litigate, prosecutors frequently agree to charge reductions (trespass instead of theft, disorderly conduct instead of battery, paraphernalia instead of possession) that preserve relief such as Cancellation, TPS, or future adjustment. And when the State refuses, we try the case. We’ve beaten “unwinnable” counts, secured split verdicts that sever the immigration ground, or obtained 364-day sentences instead of 365—tiny details that mean everything under the INA.

In short, trial advocacy isn’t our fallback plan—it’s our built-in insurance policy for clients whose lives in the United States hinge on the criminal outcome. Immigration attorneys partner with us because they know we will, quite literally, take the case as far as it needs to go. Best of all, our no-extra-cost trial policy means clients don’t have to choose between an immigration-safe strategy and a price tag they can’t afford.

Conclusion: Florida’s intersection of criminal law and immigration law is complex and can be perilous. But your client doesn’t have to navigate it alone – and neither do you. By structuring a defense around each relevant crime’s immigration consequences (as we’ve done above) and leveraging unique Florida procedural tools (like trial in absentia for ICE-detained clients ), Mitkevicius Law achieves outcomes that protect your client’s rights in criminal court and their future in the United States.

If you’re an immigration attorney in Florida (or even outside Florida with a client arrested here), reach out to us for a consultation or referral. We welcome the opportunity to collaborate and earn your trust as the criminal defense ally for your noncitizen clients. Together, we can ensure that a criminal charge does not needlessly derail an immigrant’s American dream.

Contact Mitkevicius Law, PLLC: You can call us at 850-361-2142 or use our online contact form to send details. We’ll treat your referral with priority and care. Your client’s problem today can be turned into a success story tomorrow – let’s work as a team to make that happen.

Mitkevicius Law – Florida Criminal Defense with Immigration in Mind. 🚀