ISCR Case 08-02404.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-02404.h1

grantedJul 1, 2008· Hon. Arthur E. Marshall, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 28-year-old systems analyst was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline G (Alcohol Consumption) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed several past incidents, including a DUI conviction in January 2004, to which the applicant pled no contest. Other allegations included a dismissed DUI in April 2006, a no-contest plea for disorderly conduct in May 2006, and not guilty findings for battery in February 2004 and petit theft in 2002.

The judge acknowledged the disqualifying conditions related to alcohol consumption and criminal conduct. However, the applicant successfully demonstrated significant mitigating factors. These included completing all court-ordered requirements for his DUI conviction and showing substantial maturation and stability since the incidents, such as marriage and responsible employment.

Ultimately, the judge found no evidence of ongoing alcohol-related issues or criminal conduct. Based on the demonstrated mitigation and the applicant's current stability, the security concerns were deemed resolved, and the clearance was granted.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated significant maturation and stability since the incidents.
He completed all court-ordered requirements related to his DUI conviction.
The judge found no evidence of ongoing alcohol-related issues or criminal conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct Disqualifying Condition
AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct Disqualifying Condition

Mitigating

AG ¶ 32(a)appliedCriminal Conduct Mitigating ConditionThe incidents occurred several years ago and are unlikely to recur.
AG ¶ 32(c)appliedCriminal Conduct Mitigating ConditionEvidence indicates the applicant did not commit the act in the dismissed DUI case.
AG ¶ 32(d)appliedCriminal Conduct Mitigating ConditionEvidence of successful rehabilitation and positive life changes since the incidents.
AG ¶ 22(a)notedAlcohol Consumption Disqualifying Condition
AG ¶ 22(d)notedAlcohol Consumption Disqualifying Condition

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 9, 2008
Answer filedOct 28, 2008Applicant admitted one allegation and requested a hearing.
Hearing heldFeb 4, 2009Hearing was timely convened.
Decision dateFeb 19, 2009Record closed on this date.

Cite For

Mitigation of Criminal Conduct Due to Time Elapsed and Evidence of Rehabilitation
Consideration of Personal Circumstances in Alcohol Consumption Cases
Impact of Acquittals on Security Clearance Determinations

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Incident	Response	Disqualifying (¶22)	Mitigating applied (¶23)	Mitigation
2.a	The applicant has a history of alcohol-related incidents, including a DUI conviction in January 2004.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Alcohol	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Incident

Response

Disqualifying (¶22)

Mitigating applied (¶23)

Mitigation

2.a

The applicant has a history of alcohol-related incidents, including a DUI conviction in January 2004.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Alcohol

Admitted

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	Disorderly Conduct in May 2006, to which the Applicant pled no contest.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	Credited Passage of Time
1.b	Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in April 2006, which was dismissed.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	Credited Passage of Time
1.c	Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in January 2004, to which the Applicant pled no contest.	For Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)	Credited Passage of Time Credited Rehabilitation Evidence
1.d	Battery in February 2004, for which the Applicant was found not guilty.	For Applicant	Assault or Battery	Acquitted or Found Not Guilty	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	Credited Explanation of Omission Credible
1.e	Petit Theft in 2002, for which the Applicant was found not guilty.	For Applicant	Theft or Larceny	Acquitted or Found Not Guilty	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense	Credited Explanation of Omission Credible

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

Disorderly Conduct in May 2006, to which the Applicant pled no contest.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

Credited

Passage of Time

1.b

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in April 2006, which was dismissed.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

Credited

Passage of Time

1.c

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in January 2004, to which the Applicant pled no contest.

For Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Admitted

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(d) evidence of successful rehabilitation (time, restitution, employment, etc.)

Credited

Passage of Time

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.d

Battery in February 2004, for which the Applicant was found not guilty.

For Applicant

Assault or Battery

Acquitted or Found Not Guilty

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

Credited

Explanation of Omission Credible

1.e

Petit Theft in 2002, for which the Applicant was found not guilty.

For Applicant

Theft or Larceny

Acquitted or Found Not Guilty

Denied

(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability

(c) currently on parole or probation

(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur

(c) no reliable evidence the individual committed the offense

Credited

Explanation of Omission Credible

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES