CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 23-01685 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 23-01685

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

Case Profile
Decision Date7/25/2024
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Carol G. Ricciardello
Government Counsel: Tara R. Karoian
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 58-year-old individual who sought a security clearance but faced allegations under Guideline J (criminal conduct), Guideline D (sexual behavior), and Guideline E (personal conduct). The Statement of Reasons (SOR) issued by the Department of Defense outlined multiple instances of criminal behavior, including felony arrests and convictions that the applicant failed to disclose on his security clearance application (SCA) and during a subsequent interview with a government investigator.
The applicant admitted to all allegations in the SOR, including his deliberate omission of his criminal history. He claimed that he did not remember the incidents due to their age, asserting that the SCA only required disclosure of events from the last ten years. However, the administrative judge found that the SCA explicitly required disclosure of any past criminal conduct, regardless of when it occurred. The applicant's admissions were supported by evidence from his FBI rap sheet and police reports, which detailed his criminal history, including convictions for sexual assault and other offenses.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns raised by his criminal conduct and lack of candor. The judge emphasized that the applicant's deliberate omissions and false statements during the security clearance process raised significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, ultimately leading to the denial of his eligibility for access to classified information.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline DSexual Behavior · Against Applicant
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · Against 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. 23-01685

deniedJul 25, 2024· Hon. Carol G. Ricciardello· hearing

Summary

A 58-year-old applicant was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct), Guideline D (Sexual Behavior), and Guideline E (Personal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of multiple criminal offenses and the applicant's deliberate failure to disclose these incidents on the security clearance application.

Specifically, the applicant was arrested and charged with sexual assault 1st degree, ultimately found guilty of misdemeanor sexual assault 4th degree and false imprisonment. Other offenses included an arrest and charge for driving on a suspended license and operating an uninsured motor vehicle, as well as an arrest and charge for felony criminal threat, resulting in convictions for misdemeanor criminal damage to property and battery. The applicant admitted to these offenses but failed to disclose them.

The judge determined that the applicant's omissions and concealments regarding his criminal history were serious, raising significant doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness, particularly given the nature of the sexual assault offense. The applicant did not provide mitigating evidence concerning his criminal conduct, sexual behavior, or personal conduct.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to multiple criminal offenses, including sexual assault, and failed to disclose these on his security clearance application.
The judge found the applicant's omissions and concealments serious, casting doubt on his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant did not provide mitigating evidence regarding his criminal conduct, sexual behavior, or personal conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(a)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 31(b)appliedCriminal Conduct
AG ¶ 13(a)appliedSexual Behavior
AG ¶ 16(a)appliedPersonal Conduct
AG ¶ 16(b)appliedPersonal Conduct

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 27, 2023
Answer filedJan 17, 2024Applicant elected to have the case decided on the written record.
Hearing held—Decision made based on written record.
Decision dateJul 25, 2024

Cite For

Failure to Disclose Criminal History Under Guideline E
Seriousness of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Impact of Sexual Behavior on Security Clearance Under Guideline D

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 D (Sexual Behavior) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant regarding allegations of sexual behavior, specifically a conviction for misdemeanor sexual assault and false imprisonment. The applicant's failure to disclose his criminal history was a significant factor in the decision.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant was arrested and charged with sexual assault 1st degree and found guilty of misdemeanor sexual assault 4th degree and false imprisonment.	Against Applicant	Criminal Sexual Conduct	Admitted	—	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant deliberately failed to disclose his felony criminal arrests and charges during the security clearance process. This omission was deemed significant and not mitigated by any evidence presented by the applicant, leading to a decision against the applicant under Guideline E.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
3.a	Applicant deliberately failed to disclose his felony criminal arrests and charges as alleged in SOR.	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Admitted	—	—	—
3.b	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Personal Conduct	—	Unknown	—	—	—

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 J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the majority of allegations related to criminal conduct under Guideline J. The applicant was convicted of several offenses, including misdemeanor criminal damage to property and battery, and failed to disclose his criminal history during the security clearance process, which contributed to the denial of his application.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was arrested and charged with driving on a suspended license and operating an uninsured motor vehicle.	For Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Arrested Not Charged	Admitted	—	—	—
1.b	Applicant was arrested and charged with criminal threat, a felony, and was convicted of misdemeanor criminal damage to property and battery.	Against Applicant	Assault or Battery	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability	—	—
1.c–1.g	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (3 against, 2 for the applicant). (low confidence)	Mixed		Charged Not Convicted		—	—	—

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.