Summary
A 41-year-old engineering technician was denied a security clearance under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a felony conviction for attempted murder, along with one count of wear/carry handgun, resulting from a crime of passion. The applicant was charged with attempted murder and nine related crimes, ultimately being convicted of two. At the time of the hearing, the applicant was still serving a probationary period, which was set to expire on February 15, 2010.
Disqualifying conditions under Guideline E and J were raised, specifically AG ¶ 31(a), AG ¶ 31(c), AG ¶ 31(d), and AG ¶ 16(e). While mitigating conditions AG ¶ 32(a) and AG ¶ 32(d) were applied, the judge ultimately determined they were insufficient.
The denial was based on the severity of the felony conviction, which raised significant doubts about the applicant's judgment and reliability. The ongoing probation indicated continued legal supervision and potential risk. Despite the applicant's efforts to demonstrate rehabilitation through education and positive community relationships, the judge concluded that sufficient rehabilitation had not yet been achieved to mitigate the security concerns associated with the criminal conduct.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant was convicted of felony Attempted Murder and related charges, which raised serious doubts about his judgment and reliability.
- The applicant was still on probation at the time of the hearing, indicating ongoing legal supervision and potential risk.
- The judge determined that the applicant had not yet demonstrated sufficient rehabilitation to mitigate the security concerns associated with his criminal conduct.
Conditions Referenced
- AG ¶ 31(a)raisedCriminal Conduct Disqualifying Condition 1
- AG ¶ 31(c)raisedCriminal Conduct Disqualifying Condition 2
- AG ¶ 31(d)raisedCriminal Conduct Disqualifying Condition 3
- AG ¶ 16(e)raisedPersonal Conduct Disqualifying Condition 1
- AG ¶ 32(a)rejectedCriminal Conduct Mitigating Condition 1The judge found that the time elapsed since the criminal behavior was insufficient to mitigate the severity of the crime.
- AG ¶ 32(d)rejectedCriminal Conduct Mitigating Condition 2The applicant's efforts at rehabilitation were acknowledged but deemed insufficient given the gravity of the offense.
Key Rule Quoted
“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedSep 9, 2009
- Answer filedSep 25, 2009
- Hearing heldDec 18, 2009
- Decision dateMar 23, 2010
Cite For
- Impact of Felony Convictions on Security Clearance Eligibility
- Importance of Demonstrating Rehabilitation for Serious Criminal Conduct
- Consideration of Ongoing Probation in Security Clearance Decisions