CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-00888 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 22-00888

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date3/27/2024
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Candace Le'i Garcia
Government Counsel: Karen A. Moreno-Sayles
Case Summary
ecurity clearance, the adjudicative guidelines focus on various factors, including criminal conduct and drug involvement. In this case, the applicant faced allegations under Guideline H (drug involvement and substance misuse) and Guideline J (criminal conduct) due to a positive drug test for THC in February 2019 and a prior misdemeanor embezzlement charge from 2014.
The applicant, a 29-year-old U.S. Army Reserve sergeant, admitted to the positive drug test but claimed he unknowingly used THC through a vape pen. He denied knowingly using THC monthly and explained that he had only vaped for a short period in 2019. He also acknowledged a past misdemeanor embezzlement conviction but emphasized that he had not been involved in any criminal activity since then. The applicant provided evidence of his military service, including commendations and positive evaluations, and expressed a commitment to avoiding illegal substances in the future.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that he had mitigated the security concerns related to his criminal conduct and drug involvement. The judge found the applicant's explanations credible and noted his demonstrated responsibility and commitment to his duties, which contributed to the decision to grant him eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · For Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · For Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 22-00888

grantedMar 27, 2024· Hon. Candace Le'i Garcia· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old U.S. Army Reserve sergeant was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). These concerns stemmed from a positive THC test in February 2019, which the applicant attributed to unknowingly using a vape pen. Additional issues included a 2014 misdemeanor embezzlement conviction and dismissed child neglect charges, including a related dismissed arrest warrant for failure to appear.

The judge found the applicant credible regarding the unknowing THC use, determining it did not impact his reliability. Significant time had passed since the criminal conduct without any recurrence, and the applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation. This was evidenced by compliance with child support obligations and positive character references.

Ultimately, the judge concluded that the mitigating factors outweighed the disqualifying conditions, leading to the decision to grant eligibility for access to classified information.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant was candid and credible about his unknowing use of THC, which did not raise questions about his reliability or trustworthiness.
Significant time had elapsed since the applicant's criminal behavior without recurrence, indicating unlikely future issues.
The applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation through compliance with child support obligations and positive character references.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal ConductThe applicant had a misdemeanor embezzlement conviction and was charged with child neglect.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(a)appliedTime Elapsed Since Criminal BehaviorSignificant time had passed since the applicant's criminal behavior without recurrence.
AG ¶ 32(c)appliedNo Reliable Evidence of OffenseThe child neglect charge was dismissed due to improper notification.
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedEvidence of Successful RehabilitationThe applicant has complied with child support obligations and received positive character references.

Key Rule Quoted

“The illegal use of controlled substances... can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness...”
— AG ¶ 24

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 18, 2022
Answer filedJan 19, 2023
Hearing heldDec 19, 2023via video conference
Decision dateMar 27, 2024

Cite For

Mitigation of Drug Involvement Under Guideline H Due to Unknowing Use
Successful Rehabilitation After Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Consideration of Time Elapsed Since Criminal Behavior in Security Clearance Decisions

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found in favor of the applicant regarding the allegations of drug involvement under Guideline H. The applicant tested positive for THC but claimed to have used it unknowingly through a vape pen. The judge concluded that the applicant mitigated the security concerns related to drug involvement.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant tested positive for THC on a drug test administered by his Reserve unit in February 2019.	For Applicant	Drug Test FailureWHILE CLEARED	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Withdrawn	Unspecified Drug Involvement	Unspecified	Unknown	—	—	—
1.c	Applicant admitted to using THC unknowingly through a vape pen.	For Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Occasional	Admitted	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found in favor of the applicant on all allegations under Guideline J, concluding that the applicant mitigated the concerns related to criminal conduct. The applicant had a conviction for misdemeanor embezzlement in 2014, but the judge credited mitigating factors for this and other allegations, leading to a granted decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was charged with child neglect but the charge was dismissed.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—
2.b	Applicant was issued an arrest warrant for failure to appear in court regarding child neglect but the warrant was dismissed.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	—
2.c	Applicant was convicted of misdemeanor embezzlement in 2014.	For Applicant	Fraud or Deception Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	—	(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline J). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.