Loading case…

ISCR Case ISCR Case No. 25-00023 · CASE

Case record

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.

Decision Date6/17/2026
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Government Counsel: Erin Thompson
Judge: Darlene D. Lokey Anderson
Guidelines Evaluated
- EPersonal Conduct · Against Applicant
- JCriminal Conduct · Against Applicant
Questions about ISCR ISCR Case No. 25-00023, answered from its own record: what was alleged, what the judge found, where it says so. Descriptive only; never advice.

Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only, not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

ISCR Case ISCR Case No. 25-00023denied

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. ISCR Case No. 25-00023

deniedJun 17, 2026· Hon. Darlene D. Lokey Anderson· hearing

Synopsis

Darlene D. Lokey Anderson, Administrative Judge, denied the security clearance application of a 41-year-old Maintenance Repair Technician due to significant concerns under Guideline E (Personal Conduct) and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant admitted to a long history of marijuana use, multiple criminal charges, and a pattern of dishonesty in his security clearance applications and interviews, which raised doubts about his reliability and trustworthiness.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

Applicant admitted to a long history of marijuana use and multiple criminal charges, including DUI and possession with intent to distribute.
Applicant provided false information on security clearance applications and during interviews regarding his drug use and criminal history.
The applicant's pattern of dishonesty and poor judgment demonstrated immaturity and unreliability.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A5raisedPersonal Conduct
J1raisedCriminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the government predicated upon trust and confidence.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 3, 2025
Answer filed—Date uncertain
Hearing heldMay 5, 2026
Decision dateJun 17, 2026

Cite For

Disqualifying Conditions Under Guideline E and J Due to Personal Conduct and Criminal History
Issues of Dishonesty and Lack of Candor in Security Clearance Applications
The Importance of Maintaining Trust and Confidence in the Security Clearance Process

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the personal conduct allegations under Guideline E, citing a history of poor judgment, lack of candor, and dishonesty. The applicant admitted to the allegations but did not provide sufficient mitigation to overcome the disqualifying conditions.

1.a Applicant submitted false responses on his security clearance applications regarding illegal drug use.
Finding: Against Applicant
Conduct: Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE
Concealed issue: Drug Involvement
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶16):
(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form
(b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official
Mitigating applied (¶17): —
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant submitted false responses on his security clearance applications regarding illegal drug use.	Against Applicant	Falsification Security FormFOUND DELIBERATE	Drug Involvement	Admitted	(a) deliberate omission, concealment, or falsification on a security form (b) deliberately providing false information to an investigator or official	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline E). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The administrative judge ruled against the applicant on the criminal conduct allegations under Guideline J, determining that the applicant's history of criminal activity raised significant concerns about his judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. The applicant's admissions of multiple offenses, including driving under the influence and domestic violence, contributed to the decision to deny his security clearance.

2.a In about March 2021, Applicant was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol; Driving Under the influence Blood Alcohol Above .08; Accident Involving Injury; and Driving with a Suspended or Revoked License.
Finding: Against Applicant
Offense: DUI or DWI Criminal
Criminal disposition: Charged Not Convicted
Response: Admitted
Disqualifying (¶31):
(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability
(b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction
Mitigating applied (¶32): —
Mitigation: —

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
2.a	In about March 2021, Applicant was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol; Driving Under the influence Blood Alcohol Above .08; Accident Involving Injury; and Driving with a Suspended or Revoked License.	Against Applicant	DUI or DWI Criminal	Charged Not Convicted	Admitted	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline J). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

DECISION

______________ ____

STATEMENT OF CASE

_________ DEFENSE LEGAL SERVICES AGENCY DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

In the matter of: )

)

ISCR Case No. 25-00023

)

) Applicant for Security Clearance )

Appearances For Government: Erin Thompson, Esq., Department Counsel For Applicant: Pro se 06/17/2026 Decision LOKEY ANDERSON, Darlene D., Administrative Judge: Statement of Case On March 11, 2024; and March 16, 2020, Applicant submitted security clearance applications (e-QIPs). (Government Exhibits 1 and 2.) On October 3, 2025, the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency Consolidated Adjudication Services (DCSA CAS) issued Applicant a Statement of Reasons (SOR), detailing security concerns under Guideline E, Personal Conduct and Guideline J, Criminal Conduct. The action was taken under Executive Order 10865 (EO), Safeguarding Classified Information within Industry (February 20, 1960), as amended; DoD Directive 5220.6, Defense Industrial Personnel Security Clearance Review Program (January 2, 1992), as amended (Directive); and the Adjudicative Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information, effective within the DoD after June 8, 2017. Applicant answered the SOR on a date uncertain, and requested a hearing before an administrative judge. The case was assigned to me on April 6, 2026. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals issued a notice of hearing on April 7, 2026, and the hearing was convened as scheduled on May 5, 2026. At the hearing, the Government offered seven exhibits, referred to as Government Exhibits 1 through 7, which were

admitted without objection. The Applicant offered no exhibits. He did testify on his own behalf. DOHA

FINDINGS OF FACT

eceived the transcript of the hearing (Tr.) on May 14, 2026. Findings of Fact Applicant is 41 years old. He is married and has one minor child. He has a high school diploma. He holds the position of Maintenance Repair Technician. He is seeking to obtain a security clearance in connection with his employment. Guideline E – Personal Conduct The Government alleged that Applicant is ineligible for a clearance because he engaged in conduct involving questionable judgment, lack of candor, dishonesty, or unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations, all of which raise questions about his reliability, trustworthiness, and ability to protect classified information. Of special interest is any failure to cooperate or provide truthful and candid answers during national security investigative or adjudicative processes. Applicant admits each of the allegations set forth in the SOR under this guideline. Guideline J - Criminal Conduct The Government alleged that Applicant is ineligible for a clearance because he engaged in criminal activity which creates a doubt about a person’s judgment, reliability, and trustworthiness. By its very nature, it calls into question a person’s ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations. Applicant admits each of the allegations set forth in the SOR under this guideline. Applicant began using marijuana in high school in 2001 on an occasional basis. He stated that his use was inconsistent and not continuous. He contends that from 2002 to 2004 while serving in the Army, he did not use marijuana and had passed all drug urinalysis. However, he was arrested for marijuana possession. He stated that it has been difficult for him to provide exact dates or a consistent time-line regarding his marijuana use because his use was irregular and infrequent. (Response to SOR.) He testified that he used marijuana almost daily between 2007 and 2019. He also purchased marijuana a few times a month, 3 to 4 grams at a time to supply his need. He stopped using mar

POLICIES

juana to get employed with the defense contractor in 2020 and to be able to pass their drug tests. (Government Exhibit 3, and Tr. pp. 50-53.) After graduating from high school in 2002, Applicant went directly into the U.S. Army. His military MOS was that of a Signal Support Specialist. He believes that he held a security clearance in the military, but he is not sure. Being young and immature, Applicant was hanging around the wrong crowd and got himself into trouble. His command reported him Absent Without Leave, which he contends was a big 2

misunderstanding. As a result, he did not receive a salary, and he had nothing to live on. He was unable to pay his rent and his insurance, so he decided to sell marijuana with some of his civilian friends. While on government property, it was discovered that he had marijuana in his possession. Applicant was charged with possession of 56 grams of marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 112. About a month later, in February 2005, Applicant was administratively discharged from the military with an Other Than Honorable Discharge, in lieu of a court martial. (Government Exhibits 3, 6 and 7, and Tr. p. 29.) Applicant explained that after being discharged from the Army, and still living in North Carolina, he was pulled over numerous times for speeding and he received many traffic citations. He explained that his North Carolina driver’s license was eventually permanently suspended for habitual violations. He remembers that he always seemed to be stopped by the police while he was either going or coming from work. (Tr. p. 30.) Applicant was either stopped for speeding or for Driving With a Suspended or a Revoked License in North Carolina in January 2011; March 2009; March 2008; August 2007; May 2007; March 2007; February 2007; January 2007; November 2006; October 2006; May 2006; and January 2006. (Government Exhibit 3.) Applicant was charged with being a habitual traffic offender in California in June 2016; January 2016; and January 2015. (Government Exhibits 3 and 6.) Applicant was charged with Driving With a Suspended License in North Carolina. His North Carolina driver’s license was permanently suspended after his arrest for carrying a concea

ANALYSIS

ed weapon. In April 2008, and August 2007, Applicant was charged with Carrying a Concealed Weapon. (Government Exhibit 6.) Applicant was charged with Possession of Marijuana in North Carolina in March 2019; January 2011; May 2008; and March 2008. (Government Exhibit 3.) In September 2018 Applicant was charged with Inflicting Corporal Injury on a Spouse or Cohabitant. He explained that he and his wife were having marital problems. He stated that he grabbed her by the arm and tried to push her out of the bedroom, and he left marks on her arm. Applicant called the police to tell them that the situation was elevating, and he could not calm his wife down. The police arrived, and after they saw the marks that he left on his wife’s arm, he was arrested and taken to jail. (Tr. pp. 46-47, and Government Exhibits 3 and 5.) In March 2020, Applicant began working for a defense contractor. He completed a security clearance application, also known as an e-QIP, dated March 16, 2020. In Section 23, of the application, concerning Illegal Use of Drugs or Drug Activity; Illegal Use of Drugs or Controlled Substances; it asked, “In the last seven years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances?” Applicant answered, “NO.” (Government Exhibit 2.) This was a false response. Applicant failed to disclose that he had used marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. 3

Applicant was interviewed by an investigator for the DoD on April 15, 2020. During the interview, Applicant stated that he had never used marijuana. (Government Exhibit 3.) This was a false response. Applicant deliberately failed to disclose that he had used marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. Applicant was also interviewed again by an investigator for the DoD on June 13, 2020. During the interview, Applicant stated that despite having marijuana possession charges, he stated that he had never used marijuana. (Government Exhibit 3.) This was a false response. Applicant deliberately failed to disclose that he had used with marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. In about March 2021, Applicant was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol; Driving Under the influence Blood Alcohol Above .08; Accident Involving Injury; and Driving with a Suspended or Revoked License. Applicant explained that he and his wife were having marital problems. Applicant had moved out and got his own apartment. It was St. Patrick’s Day, and he went over to visit his wife at her place. They had dinner and then started arguing. Applicant had been drinking. He left her house and while speeding home, he lost control of the car and hit another vehicle. He panicked and ran away from the scene. He returned a few hours later to look for his phone that he had dropped. The police saw him and stopped him for questioning. He had blood on his nose from falling and running from the scene. Applicant was arrested and taken to jail. Applicant stated that the car he hit had two people in it. The driver was fine, but the passenger’s leg was injured. Applicant’s car insurance was in his wife’s name and the damage from the accident was covered by her insurance. Applicant spent time in jail and had to pay restitution and fines. He stated that he has successfully had the three felonies reduced to one misdemeanor for Reckless Driving. He also stated that he no longer drinks and drives. (Government Exhibits 5 and 6.) Applicant completed another security clearance application, also known as an e- QIP, dated March 11, 2024, In Section 23, of the application concerning Illegal Use of Drugs or Drug Activity; Illegal Use of Drugs or Controlled Substances; it asked, “In the last seven years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances?” Applicant answered, “NO.” (Government Exhibit 1.) This was a false response. Applicant again failed to disclose that he has used marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. In response to interrogatories from DOHA dated April 9, 2025, Applicant stated that the last time he used marijuana was in January 2013. (Government Exhibit 3.) This was a false response. Applicant had used marijuana with varying frequency from about 2001 to 2019. Applicant stated that he deliberately falsified an e-mail he sent to his supervisor on March 23, 2021, denying that he was involved in his March 17, 2021, arrest and charges for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. (Government Exhibit 4.) After being arrested, in fear of being terminated from his job, Applicant told his wife to call his boss and tell him that he was in an accident. At some point his boss wanted more details. Since Applicant’s face had been injured, (his eye was swollen shut, and while jumping a fence, he fell off 4

and hit his head), he told his boss that he had been carjacked. Applicant wrote the story out to document the event. (Tr. p. 40-42.) Applicant’s boss eventually found out that Applicant had lied and had actually been arrested and charged with three felony offenses. His boss could not justify keeping him on the job, and Applicant was terminated. Applicant stated that it took him over a year to get his license back, pay the fines, and settle the sentencing conditions with the court. Applicant was placed on probation for three years, no contact with police, no alcohol, and no trouble. After six months, Applicant petitioned to get his probation terminated early. In May 2025, Applicant received his California driver’s license. (Government Exhibit 5.) Applicant testified that when he left North Carolina to move to California in 2020, he left behind many open criminal cases. Those cases turned into Warrants for Failure to Appear. When he returned to North Carolina to visit a friend, he was pulled over and arrested. Applicant spent more than 20 days in jail in North Carolina and received credit for time served that covered his fines and other related matters concerning those earlier open cases. (Tr. p. 54-55.) Applicant stated that since 2021, he has had no interactions with the police, not even for a speeding ticket. He stated that about five years ago, he started to undergo personal and professional growth. He believes that he has greatly matured and has learned the importance of integrity, accountability, and the lasting consequences of his actions. He is remorseful for the inaccuracies on his security clearance applications, during his interviews, and in response to interrogatories. He stated that it was never his intent to mislead the Government or to be dishonest in any way. In any event, now he is trying to point his life in the right direction and fix the things of the past.

ANALYSIS

use or Cohabitant. He explained that he and his wife were having marital problems. He stated that he grabbed her by the arm and tried to push her out of the bedroom, and he left marks on her arm. Applicant called the police to tell them that the situation was elevating, and he could not calm his wife down. The police arrived, and after they saw the marks that he left on his wife’s arm, he was arrested and taken to jail. (Tr. pp. 46-47, and Government Exhibits 3 and 5.) In March 2020, Applicant began working for a defense contractor. He completed a security clearance application, also known as an e-QIP, dated March 16, 2020. In Section 23, of the application, concerning Illegal Use of Drugs or Drug Activity; Illegal Use of Drugs or Controlled Substances; it asked, “In the last seven years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances?” Applicant answered, “NO.” (Government Exhibit 2.) This was a false response. Applicant failed to disclose that he had used marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. 3

ANALYSIS

er was fine, but the passenger’s leg was injured. Applicant’s car insurance was in his wife’s name and the damage from the accident was covered by her insurance. Applicant spent time in jail and had to pay restitution and fines. He stated that he has successfully had the three felonies reduced to one misdemeanor for Reckless Driving. He also stated that he no longer drinks and drives. (Government Exhibits 5 and 6.) Applicant completed another security clearance application, also known as an e- QIP, dated March 11, 2024, In Section 23, of the application concerning Illegal Use of Drugs or Drug Activity; Illegal Use of Drugs or Controlled Substances; it asked, “In the last seven years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances?” Applicant answered, “NO.” (Government Exhibit 1.) This was a false response. Applicant again failed to disclose that he has used marijuana from about 2001 to 2019. In response to interrogatories from DOHA dated April 9, 2025, Applicant stated that the last time he used marijuana was in January 2013. (Government Exhibit 3.) This was a false response. Applicant had used marijuana with varying frequency from about 2001 to 2019. Applicant stated that he deliberately falsified an e-mail he sent to his supervisor on March 23, 2021, denying that he was involved in his March 17, 2021, arrest and charges for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. (Government Exhibit 4.) After being arrested, in fear of being terminated from his job, Applicant told his wife to call his boss and tell him that he was in an accident. At some point his boss wanted more details. Since Applicant’s face had been injured, (his eye was swollen shut, and while jumping a fence, he fell off 4

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

ook him over a year to get his license back, pay the fines, and settle the sentencing conditions with the court. Applicant was placed on probation for three years, no contact with police, no alcohol, and no trouble. After six months, Applicant petitioned to get his probation terminated early. In May 2025, Applicant received his California driver’s license. (Government Exhibit 5.) Applicant testified that when he left North Carolina to move to California in 2020, he left behind many open criminal cases. Those cases turned into Warrants for Failure to Appear. When he returned to North Carolina to visit a friend, he was pulled over and arrested. Applicant spent more than 20 days in jail in North Carolina and received credit for time served that covered his fines and other related matters concerning those earlier open cases. (Tr. p. 54-55.) Applicant stated that since 2021, he has had no interactions with the police, not even for a speeding ticket. He stated that about five years ago, he started to undergo personal and professional growth. He believes that he has greatly matured and has learned the importance of integrity, accountability, and the lasting consequences of his actions. He is remorseful for the inaccuracies on his security clearance applications, during his interviews, and in response to interrogatories. He stated that it was never his intent to mislead the Government or to be dishonest in any way. In any event, now he is trying to point his life in the right direction and fix the things of the past.

FORMAL FINDINGS

(Tr. p. 45, and Applicant’s Response to the SOR.) Applicant stated that the birth of his daughter has helped him finally grow up. She is counting on him for direction and support, and he must give her good guidance. He wants to set good examples for her because he does not want her to make the same mistakes he made. (Tr. p. 57.) He now spends time with his family and no longer associates with drug users. Applicant regrets his immaturity and bad conduct in the military. He wanted to become a Ranger, and loved jumping out of planes. (Tr. p. 58.) He believes that his paperwork somewhere erroneously shows that he received a “Dishonorable Discharge” from the military, and that it has prevented him from receiving disability for his PTSD he got during his overseas deployment. He has not yet discussed the paperwork error with the Army, but he plans to do so in the future. He has tried to file disability claims with the VA, but they have been denied. (Tr. pp. 58-60.) A

CONCLUSION

plicant has not sought out or received any personal counseling. He has received marriage counseling and found it to be helpful. He is very involved in his daughter’s martial arts career (Tr. p. 59.) 5