The Maryland Appellate Court, Maryland’s second-highest court, ruled recently that a man who had a federal misdemeanor conviction on his criminal record since 1999 was properly denied a handgun qualification license based on Maryland law. The case is likely to affect more than the right of Maryland residents to own a gun. If you need a gun for your job, you may now be ineligible. If you have a criminal conviction, the granting of a professional license may be more difficult.

According to a report in the Maryland Daily Record, the higher court ruled that the state police properly denied the man’s request because his federal conviction was “equivalent” to a Maryland state law that would disqualify him from obtaining the handgun qualification license (gun permit). The federal misdemeanor conviction was for witness tampering.

Maryland state law provides that residents of Maryland can be denied the right to a handgun qualification license if they have a conviction that is considered “disqualifying.” Examples of disqualifying crimes include a felony or a misdemeanor where the penalty for a conviction is possibly more than two years in prison.

The higher court found that the applicant’s 1999 conviction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia was a disqualifying crime because, in Maryland, the sentence for a comparable witness tampering could be up to 10 years. The three-judge panel of the Maryland Appellate Court confirmed the decision by the Maryland State Police to deny the man’s application.

Note that the higher court considered the maximum sentence and not the actual sentence. The 1999 federal court conviction resulted in “six months of home detention and five years of probation,” according to court records. The Appellate Court judge who authored the opinion wrote, “In short, it is irrelevant what the laws of Maryland were at the time of his conviction; what matters is that the statute deemed comparable to the out-of-state conviction was in place at the time he submitted his HQL application.”

How the Appellate Court’s decision could have wider reaching effects

That the Court ruled one crime in Jurisdiction A was comparable to a different crime in Jurisdiction B is not uncommon; after all, the federal government and all 50 state governments have different wordings for different charges. What makes this ruling important, we believe, is that it was based on the maximum potential sentence, not the actual sentence. Imagine if you received a probation before judgment (PBJ) for possessing stolen property when you were 21, and then were denied a professional license later in your career because the maximum penalty for felony theft is 20 years in prison.

How it could affect security clearances

Some government and military workers such as law enforcement officials need to be able to carry and use a gun. They also need security clearances. The appellate court decision directly jeopardizes the ability to own a gun. If the worker can’t carry or use a gun, then they can’t obtain or keep their security clearance, which means they’ll be denied the ability to work for the government or the military.

With the loss of the security clearance comes more than just the loss of a job, too. Servicemembers, for example, may lose their homes if they live on base; so, too, would their families. They may be forced to pay back educational costs they obtained through the G.I. bill or some kind of grant. They could lose access to certain health benefits.

Workers who don’t need to use a gun but do wish to work for the government or the military may also be affected by the decision. The US State Department and state and federal licensing agencies have the right to conduct criminal background checks. Until this appellate court decision, these agencies might have been willing to overlook one prior, seemingly minor conviction as long as the applicant was honest about it on his or her application. Now, as a result of this decision, the agencies may be more inclined to review the possible prison sentence in terms of disqualification, even if your actual sentence was much less than the maximum.

Other workers who may be affected

If you work for the State of Maryland – even if you do not directly correspond with the federal government – you could still require a security clearance of some kind. Contractors, consultants, engineers, data analysts, interpreters, and even custodial staff or construction workers may all require security clearances.

For example, construction crews who put up new buildings (or repair old ones) may be required to have clearances to work on those buildings. However, a construction company or labor union may not require the same level of background checks that a government does, or may be more willing to overlook a conviction if it is for a misdemeanor or if it occurred 20 years ago. However, that company or union may now find that it cannot send a particular worker or bid on a certain job because that worker can no longer obtain/renew a security clearance.

If you are seeking a security clearance or a professional license or were denied a security clearance or a professional license, in Bowie, Crofton, or anywhere in Maryland, Carey Law Office is ready to represent you. We’ve been fighting for the accused for nearly 40 years. We keep current with the most recent laws and court decisions and assert every defense that can help you preserve your freedom and your rights. Call our offices or fill out our contact form to schedule a consultation. We have offices in Bowie, Crofton, and Owings, and also serve Calvert County and the surrounding areas.