ISCR Case 03-15634.h2

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-15634.h2

grantedDec 7, 2004· Hon. Robert Robinson Gales· hearing

Summary

A 41-year-old applicant's security clearance was GRANTED despite a history of criminal conduct, specifically Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The Statement of Reasons detailed a 1988 state court conviction for three counts of cocaine trafficking, resulting in a nine-year suspended sentence with less than one year served. Additionally, the applicant was arrested in March 1995 for unlawful possession of methamphetamine but was found not guilty in June 1995.

Disqualifying conditions related to criminal conduct were initially raised. However, the judge applied mitigating conditions, noting the significant passage of time since the last criminal conduct and evidence of rehabilitation.

Crucially, the amendment of 10 U.S.C. § 986 altered the criteria for disqualification. Because the applicant's actual time served for the 1988 conviction was less than one year, it no longer served as a disqualifying factor under the revised statute. The judge also found that the applicant had successfully demonstrated rehabilitation and maintained abstinence from substance abuse since 1995, leading to the decision to grant the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant's actual time served was less than one year, which no longer disqualifies her under the amended 10 U.S.C. § 986.
The applicant demonstrated successful rehabilitation and abstained from substance abuse since 1995.
The judge found that the applicant's criminal conduct was not recent and had been mitigated by her subsequent behavior.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

CC DC E2.A10.1.2.1raisedAllegations or Admissions of Criminal Conduct
CC DC E2.A10.1.2.2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
CC DC E2.A10.1.2.3raisedConviction in a Federal or State Court

Mitigating

CC MC E2.A10.1.3.1appliedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not Recent
CC MC E2.A10.1.3.6appliedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful Rehabilitation
CC MC E2.A10.1.3.2rejectedThe Crime Was an Isolated IncidentThe judge concluded that the applicant's overall course of criminal conduct was not isolated.

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 23, 2003
Answer filedNov 20, 2003
Hearing heldN/ADecided on the written record.
Decision dateDec 7, 2004

Cite For

Application of Amended 10 U.S.C. § 986 Regarding Disqualification for Criminal Conduct
Successful Rehabilitation and Its Impact on Security Clearance Eligibility
Consideration of the Passage of Time in Evaluating Past Criminal Conduct

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
1.a	The applicant was convicted in a state court of three counts of trafficking a controlled substance, cocaine, and sentenced to nine years in prison on each count, all of which was suspended except for time served (which was less than one year).	For Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction (c) currently on parole or probation	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited No Subsequent Offenses Credited Rehabilitation Evidence
1.b	In March 1995, the applicant was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of controlled dangerous substance, methamphetamine, but was found not guilty in June 1995.	For Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Acquitted or Found Not Guilty	Denied	—	(a) so much time has passed, or unusual circumstances, that it is unlikely to recur (b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure	Credited No Subsequent Offenses Credited Rehabilitation Evidence

Allegation

Finding

Offense

Criminal disposition

Response

Disqualifying (¶31)

Mitigating applied (¶32)

Mitigation

1.a

The applicant was convicted in a state court of three counts of trafficking a controlled substance, cocaine, and sentenced to nine years in prison on each count, all of which was suspended except for time served (which was less than one year).

For Applicant

Drug Related Criminal Charge

Convicted

Admitted

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

(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction

(c) currently on parole or probation

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

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

No Subsequent Offenses

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

1.b

In March 1995, the applicant was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of controlled dangerous substance, methamphetamine, but was found not guilty in June 1995.

For Applicant

Unspecified Criminal Conduct

Acquitted or Found Not Guilty

Denied

—

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

(b) pressured/coerced and unlikely to recur absent that pressure

Credited

No Subsequent Offenses

Credited

Rehabilitation Evidence

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

CONCLUSION

FORMAL FINDINGS

DECISION

FOOTNOTES