Summary
A 41-year-old applicant sought a security clearance, facing concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to past criminal conduct. As an 18-year-old in 1980, the applicant was arrested and subsequently convicted on charges including possession of marijuana, cocaine, and paraphernalia, 13 counts of theft, and four counts of breaking and entering. The sentences included various periods of confinement, with a total actual incarceration of less than one year, much of which was suspended.
These past actions raised disqualifying conditions related to allegations or admissions of criminal conduct, a single serious crime or multiple lesser offenses, and conviction with a sentence of imprisonment exceeding one year. However, the judge applied mitigating conditions, noting the applicant's demonstrated substantial rehabilitation since 1980.
Crucially, recent amendments to 10 U.S.C. § 986 were found to no longer disqualify the applicant based on his prior convictions, particularly given that his actual period of incarceration was less than one year. Consequently, the security clearance was granted.
Why the Applicant Prevailed
- The applicant demonstrated substantial evidence of successful rehabilitation since his criminal conduct in 1980.
- Recent amendments to 10 U.S.C. § 986 allowed for the applicant's eligibility despite prior convictions.
- The applicant's actual period of incarceration was less than one year, which is no longer disqualifying under the amended law.
Conditions Referenced
- E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct, Regardless of Whether the Person Was Formally Charged
- E2.A10.1.2.2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
- E2.A10.1.2.3raisedConviction in a Federal or State Court, Including a Court-martial of a Crime and Sentenced to Imprisonment for a Term Exceeding One Year
- E2.A10.1.3.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
- E2.A10.1.3.6appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation
- E2.A10.1.3.2rejectedThe Crime Was an Isolated IncidentThe judge found that the conduct occurred over a period of days in different cities.
Key Rule Quoted
“A person should not be held forever accountable for misconduct from the past when there is a substantial indication of subsequent reform, remorse, or rehabilitation.”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedOct 16, 2003
- Answer filedOct 28, 2003
- Hearing heldMar 17, 2004
- Decision dateDec 7, 2004Remanded for consideration of amended law.
Cite For
- Application of 10 U.S.C. § 986 Amendments in Security Clearance Cases
- Successful Rehabilitation Mitigating Disqualifying Criminal Conduct
- Consideration of Past Conduct in Light of Current Legal Standards