Summary
A 44-year-old systems engineer was denied a security clearance under Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) due to a felony conviction and other driving-related offenses. In 1998, the applicant was convicted of converting government property, sentenced to five years probation, and ordered to pay $11,927.27 in restitution. This felony conviction was a primary concern, particularly as it occurred while the applicant held a top secret security clearance.
Additional criminal conduct included a 1990 reckless driving charge, which resulted in a nolo contendere plea and a $244 fine. In November 1998, the applicant faced charges of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and reckless driving. He subsequently pled guilty to a reduced charge of Driving While Ability Impaired, leading to 12 months probation, an alcohol evaluation program, 24 hours of community service, and a fine and court costs totaling $349.
Despite the application of mitigating conditions, the judge found that the applicant's criminal conduct, especially the felony conviction involving government property valued over $10,000, raised significant concerns about his judgment and trustworthiness. The applicant's minimization of his wrongdoing further undermined his credibility and claims of rehabilitation, ultimately leading to the denial of his security clearance.
Why the Applicant Was Denied
- The applicant was convicted of a felony for converting government property valued over $10,000.
- The applicant's minimization of his criminal conduct undermined his credibility and claims of rehabilitation.
- The applicant's last criminal offense occurred while he held a top secret security clearance.
Conditions Referenced
- DC 2raisedA Single Serious Crime or Multiple Lesser Offenses
- MC 1rejectedThe Criminal Behavior Was Not RecentThe applicant's minimization of wrongdoing diminished the weight of this mitigating condition.
- MC 4rejectedThe Person Did Not Voluntarily Commit the Act And/or the Factors Leading to the Violation Are Not Likely to Recur
- MC 6rejectedThere Is Clear Evidence of Successful RehabilitationThe applicant's evidence of rehabilitation was insufficient compared to the severity of his past conduct.
Key Rule Quoted
“No one has a right to a security clearance and "the clearly consistent standard indicates that security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials."”
Procedural Posture
- SOR issuedMar 31, 2005
- Answer filedMay 9, 2005
- Hearing heldSep 29, 2005
- Decision dateNov 29, 2005
Cite For
- Criminal Conduct as a Disqualifying Factor Under Guideline J
- Credibility Issues Arising From Minimization of Past Criminal Behavior
- The Standard of Proof Required in Security Clearance Cases.