CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01027 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-01027

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

Case Profile
Decision Date8/29/2024
Statusgranted
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Robert E. Coacher
Government Counsel: Andrew H. Henderson
Applicant's Counsel: Carl Anthony Marrone
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 33-year-old former U.S. Marine Corps officer who sought a security clearance after being issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guidelines J (criminal conduct), F (financial considerations), and E (personal conduct). The core allegations included a guilty plea to a harassment charge stemming from an incident involving a former partner, as well as financial delinquencies totaling approximately $58,253.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the allegations under Guideline J and one under Guideline F, while denying the personal conduct allegation. He explained that his financial difficulties began around 2019 due to his marital separation and subsequent obligations, which led to his inability to meet all financial commitments. The applicant successfully completed probation and a domestic violence course, demonstrating personal growth and a commitment to change. He also provided evidence of his current employment and financial stability.
The administrative judge ruled in favor of the applicant, granting his eligibility for a security clearance. The judge concluded that the applicant had sufficiently mitigated the security concerns by demonstrating rehabilitation, a stable financial situation, and a commitment to responsible conduct following his past issues. The judge noted the applicant's proactive steps to address his behavior and financial challenges as significant factors in the decision.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · For Applicant
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · 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. 23-01027

grantedAug 29, 2024· Hon. Robert E. Coacher· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old former U.S. Marine Corps officer was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guidelines J (Criminal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and E (Personal Conduct). These concerns stemmed from an August 2021 arrest for third-degree assault and harassment, which resulted in a guilty plea to a lesser harassment charge, a sentence of 24 months of supervised probation, and an order to attend domestic violence counseling.

Additionally, the applicant faced issues related to six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. Personal conduct concerns arose from an administrative separation from the USMC in November 2020 following nonjudicial punishment for an affair with a fellow officer.

The applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. He completed his probation and domestic violence counseling without violations, demonstrating successful rehabilitation. His financial situation significantly improved, including the establishment of a funded emergency account, and he showed a commitment to resolving his financial obligations. Based on these mitigating factors, the security clearance was GRANTED.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant completed probation and domestic violence counseling with no violations.
He demonstrated successful rehabilitation and a commitment to resolving his financial obligations.
The applicant's current financial situation has improved significantly, with a funded emergency account.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(b)raisedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 18(a)raisedFinancial Considerations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(a)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 20(a)appliedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 20(c)appliedFinancial Considerations
AG ¶ 17(c)appliedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJun 13, 2023
Answer filedJun 21, 2023
Hearing heldMay 14, 2024Hearing rescheduled twice.
Decision dateAug 29, 2024

Cite For

Successful Rehabilitation After Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Mitigation of Financial Difficulties Under Guideline F
Consideration of Personal Conduct Issues Under Guideline E

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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant was administratively separated from the USMC following nonjudicial punishment for an affair with a fellow officer. However, the judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that the incident no longer casts doubt on his reliability, trustworthiness, and judgment, and that mitigating conditions substantially applied.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	On or about November 2020, you were administratively separated from the USMC following nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an affair with a fellow officer.	For Applicant	Questionable Judgment General	—	Denied	—	(a) prompt, good-faith correction before being confronted (b) omission/refusal followed advice of counsel; later cooperated fully	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: granted

The judge found that the applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. However, the judge ruled in favor of the applicant, indicating that the financial issues were mitigated by the applicant's documented efforts to resolve the debts using inheritance funds.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
2.b	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
2.c	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
2.d	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
2.e	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—
2.f	Applicant was delinquent on six charged-off accounts totaling approximately $58,253. $58,253	For Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). 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 that the applicant was arrested and charged with third-degree assault and harassment, to which he pled guilty to a lesser charge of harassment. He was sentenced to 24 months of supervised probation and ordered to attend domestic violence counseling. The judge ruled in favor of the applicant, concluding that the incident no longer casts doubt on his reliability, trustworthiness, and judgment, and that mitigating conditions applied.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	On August 25, 2021, Applicant was arrested and charged with third-degree assault and harassment. He pled guilty to a lesser charge of harassment-strike/shove/kick. He was sentenced to 24 months of supervised probation and ordered to attend domestic violence counseling.	For Applicant	Domestic Violence	Convicted	Admitted	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	—

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.