My husband was just offered an externship position with the Court. Before he begins his externship, he must submit to a thorough background check. The instructions for the background check recommend a full disclosure of all prior arrests, convictions, and any finger printing even w/o arrest and note that prior externs not disclosing even expunged records have been booted from the program. He has a sealed record from the time he was 15-16, from about 20 years ago (I can disclose the nature of the crime in vague detail if it is necessary to factually answer my question).
Does he have to disclose this, and if so, what possible bearing this will have regarding this position? He is quite understandably worried that a major screwup committed when he was a dumb teen is going to cost him his success, so he throws himself upon the mercy of knowledgeable Dopers.
I think a simple comment to the effect that there was an incident when he was a juvenile which is now sealed should cover it. If they want more detail, they can ask. I wouldn’t think it would be within their rights to know the details on something which (a) is sealed and (b) happened when he was a juvenile, but I am not a lawyer.
AFAIK, if a record is sealed that means it is not a matter of public record. To me that means I can’t find out about it unless your husband tells me. However, I don’t think that a sealed record means that the information is unavailable to everyone. The Court would almost certainly have the ability to check sealed and expunged records.
This post comes with the standard caveats- IANAL and anything I posted here is supposition.
I imagine that one of our resident law people will pop by and give a better answer.
Yeah, I always thought a sealed record never counted, but this is the Superior Court, so who knows? We both have sealed records and have the same career ambitions, so now I’m worried about *my *record, too.
I have a sealed record from when I was 11 for a felony (just the wrong place, wrong time, hanging around the wrong folks) and I had my background run by a police department when I was applying for a job and by a probation officer later on in life and they never saw it at all.
The probation officer wasn’t mine, but a good friend who ran my record at my request.
Don’t know if that would apply to your situation or not, but they didn’t see my sealed stuf.
No insights on sealed records. But as explained to me in the course of my interview for an entirely unrelated job in an unrelated location, having been arrested for bank robbery in the past couple of years would not (neccessarily) disqualify me from the position. But, if I didn’t disclose that arrest, and they did the background check and discovered it, I would be disqualified from the position.
This is even more likely to be true with less significant-sounding arrests. So I agree with KneadToKnow, don’t hope and assume that they won’t find out about it, admit the truth “Twenty years ago, when I was a dumb teen, I did something stupid. The record was sealed, I’ve learned from my mistake, I’m willing to provide more details if it’s neccessary, but I’d rather not talk about it if I don’t have to.”
That pretty much sums up what I told my husband. I figured they (even if “they” is the State DoJ) couldn’t hold it against him for having a sealed record, but would be pretty pissed if he didn’t say anything at all. I think they’re looking more for “is this guy honest about his background” than “Oh we can’t hire a former teenaged felon!”
I’m also a little confused about “expunged” vs. “sealed”. Is that the same thing?
As a general comment about the informational environment we live in, I will note one other thing. Once upon a time, when you were arrested, the information was typed up, stuck in a file drawer, and only a few copies existed. Sealing them, expunging them, destroying them, only required making a few copies vanish.
And then computers were invented, and the internet. And suddenly records which only existed in a few places started multiplying. And when someone pushes a button and says “let’s erase this copy” only some of the copies get erased. And it becomes much harder to track down every copy of a report.
So, depending on when and where you were arrested, etc. there may only ever have been a few paper copies now lost forever, or there may be dozens of electronic copies. The person whose few paper copies are now lost forever is probably safe in pretending the event never took place at all. The person with all of those electronic copies floating around is better off admitting that the arrest took place and saying that the records should have been expunged.
Sometimes people are more interested in whether or not you are trying to hide something than exactly what you may have been arrested for–especially if it happened long ago, was minor, and is irrelevant to the present matter.
Disclaimer: My practical knowledge of the ins and outs of the police department is nonexistant. So obviously, treat anything I got right as common sense, and anything I got wrong as me guessing.
Some years ago, I worked as an administrative law judge determining appeals of licensure denials. I can tell you that for the agency I worked for, the distinction drawn by Eureka is a hugely important one: If you were clearly directed to disclose ALL arrests EVER and you do not, then you would be denied a license, not because of the arrest but because of your failure to disclose it. No Oops, I forgot it or Oops, I didn’t think you meant juvenile offenses or Oops, I must not have read that part of the form. You signed that “the information above is true and correct” and it wasn’t. Your license is denied.
Especially when the instructions clearly state that expunged records are included, I don’t see that he has any choice but to disclose it and hope for the best. I would disclose, but I would also include an explanation or ask for an opportunity to explain.
Because I am unclear on expunged vs. sealed in our jurisdiction. I googled around and found an application for employment with the Court, and it had this:
Of course I have no idea if that is par for what kind of background check he’s going to be dealing with. I am not sure whether the process is the same for the janitor as it is for judicial externs (the application is current but appears to be a ‘catch all’ application).
The memo from the supervising attorney stated “expunged records”. So at this point that is where most of my confusion stems from. Husband will probably just show up to his appointment with HR to do the paperwork and ask them on the spot. I just hope it doesn’t raise any eyebrows.
Jodi, thanks for your detailed reply, and thanks to everyone else as well.
I commited several serious property crimes when I was around 14-15 years old. This was in the mid fifties. About 12 to 14 years later I had a background check for a secret clearance in the military. I did not disclose my juvenile record, as I had been told it was sealed by the court and would not effect me as an adult. I do recall being concerned about disclosure at the time. I was cleared by the check and no mention of my juvenile record was ever made, so I’m assuming it wasn’t available. This was quite some time ago and record keeping was more localized back then, so I don’t know if it would hold true today.