ISCR Case 02-32168.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 02-32168.h1

deniedFeb 4, 2005· Hon. Barry M. Sax· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old security guard was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The denial stemmed from a history of seven criminal incidents and the falsification of his security clearance application.

The applicant's criminal record included multiple charges of domestic violence, with incidents occurring in October 2001, August 1999, and June 1999, among others. While some domestic violence charges were dismissed due to the victim's failure to appear or the state not being ready to proceed, one instance resulted in court-ordered counseling and a period of good behavior. He was also charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Hit and Run, leading to a conviction for DUI, fines totaling $370, mandatory attendance at DUI school and a Victim Impact Panel, and two days in jail. Another incident involved refusing a breath test at a military facility, resulting in three years of probation. The applicant also voluntarily attended Stress Management and Domestic Violence classes.

Furthermore, the applicant intentionally falsified his security clearance application. He answered "No" to Question 26 regarding police records for other offenses in the last seven years, omitting mention of his arrests in October 2001, August 1999, and June 1999 for domestic violence. He also answered "No" to Question 38 concerning financial delinquencies of 180 days or more, failing to disclose a debt of $180 that was more than 180 days delinquent as of July 2003. The judge found no mitigating factors to offset these concerns, leading to the denial of the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant had a history of seven criminal incidents, including multiple domestic violence charges and a DUI.
The applicant falsified his security clearance application by omitting relevant arrests.
No mitigating factors were established to counter the security concerns raised by the applicant's conduct.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

J1raisedCriminal Conduct
J2raisedCriminal Conduct
E2raisedPersonal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“An applicant's admission of the information in specific allegations relieves the Government of having to prove those allegations.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 4, 2003
Answer filedJan 6, 2004Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Hearing held—Decision made on the written record.
Decision dateFeb 4, 2005

Cite For

Denial of Clearance Due to a Pattern of Criminal Conduct Under Guideline J
Falsification of Security Clearance Application Under Guideline E
Lack of Mitigating Factors in Cases of Repeated Criminal Behavior.

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a	answered "No" to Question 26 "Your Police Record - Other Offenses In the last seven years," and intentionally omitted any mention of the arrests in October 2001, August 1999, and June 1999 for domestic violence;	Against Applicant	Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE	Criminal Conduct	Denied	—	—	—
2.b	answered "No" to Question 38 "Your Financial Delinquencies - 180 Days In the last seven years" and intentionally omitted any mention that, of July 2003, he was more than 180 days delinquent on a debt for $180 reported in September 2000.	For Applicant	Omission or Failure to Disclose	—	Denied	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Conduct

Concealed Issue

Response

Disqualifying (¶16)

Mitigating applied (¶17)

Mitigation

2.a

answered "No" to Question 26 "Your Police Record - Other Offenses In the last seven years," and intentionally omitted any mention of the arrests in October 2001, August 1999, and June 1999 for domestic violence;

Against Applicant

Omission or Failure to DiscloseFOUND DELIBERATE

Criminal Conduct

Denied

—

2.b

answered "No" to Question 38 "Your Financial Delinquencies - 180 Days In the last seven years" and intentionally omitted any mention that, of July 2003, he was more than 180 days delinquent on a debt for $180 reported in September 2000.

For Applicant

Omission or Failure to Disclose

—

Denied

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	charged with domestic violence. The charge was refiled on February 4, 2002, but the matter was dismissed when the victim failed to appear;	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—
1.b	charged with domestic violence - 2nd offense. The state was not ready to proceed and the charges were dismissed;	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	charged with domestic violence. The charge was dismissed when the victim failed to appear.	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—
1.d	charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Hit and Run. Applicant was found guilty and fined $200, an Alcoholics Anonymous fee of $70, and an $60 analysis fee, for a total of $370. He was also ordered to attend DUI school, attend a Victim Impact Panel; and spend two days in jail (credit for time served), the Hit and Run charge was dismissed;	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Convicted	Denied	—	—	—
1.e	charged with Domestic Violence. He attended court ordered counseling, and was to stay out of trouble for six months, after which the charges were dismissed;	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Admitted	—	—	—
1.f	Refused to take a Breath Test at an MP station in a military facility. He was placed on probation for three years. He had been consuming alcohol prior to the arrest.	Against Applicant	Traffic Offense Pattern	Conduct No Charge	Denied	—	—	—
1.g	volunteered for Stress Management and Domestic Violence classes at a Naval hospital.	Against Applicant	Domestic Violence	Conduct No Charge	Admitted	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

charged with domestic violence. The charge was refiled on February 4, 2002, but the matter was dismissed when the victim failed to appear;

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

—

1.b

charged with domestic violence - 2nd offense. The state was not ready to proceed and the charges were dismissed;

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

—

1.c

charged with domestic violence. The charge was dismissed when the victim failed to appear.

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Denied

—

1.d

charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Hit and Run. Applicant was found guilty and fined $200, an Alcoholics Anonymous fee of $70, and an $60 analysis fee, for a total of $370. He was also ordered to attend DUI school, attend a Victim Impact Panel; and spend two days in jail (credit for time served), the Hit and Run charge was dismissed;

Against Applicant

DUI or DWI Criminal

Convicted

Denied

—

1.e

charged with Domestic Violence. He attended court ordered counseling, and was to stay out of trouble for six months, after which the charges were dismissed;

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

Dismissed or Nolle Prossed

Admitted

—

1.f

Refused to take a Breath Test at an MP station in a military facility. He was placed on probation for three years. He had been consuming alcohol prior to the arrest.

Against Applicant

Traffic Offense Pattern

Conduct No Charge

Denied

—

1.g

volunteered for Stress Management and Domestic Violence classes at a Naval hospital.

Against Applicant

Domestic Violence

Conduct No Charge

Admitted

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES