Become airline pilot with expunged record?

Thats good advice, I will do that tomorrow. So in theory, if I disclose and get my medical, by the time its time for airlines the distance between should be enough to answer "no" if they ask "in the past 10 years have you ever" correct?

Do you recommend I go ahead and get the medical since you said the process will take a few months longer than normal?
 
Also, will it ever be possible to get hired onto a major with this? I have read that it would be virtually impossible to get a major with a felony.
 
thecunningone said:
Thats good advice, I will do that tomorrow. So in theory, if I disclose and get my medical, by the time its time for airlines the distance between should be enough to answer "no" if they ask "in the past 10 years have you ever" correct?

Do you recommend I go ahead and get the medical since you said the process will take a few months longer than normal?
Click to expand...

I don’t believe you are under any legal obligation to disclose the expungement to a potential employer at all. It may even be illegal for them to base a hiring decision on an expunged record. But this depends on the state.

I would not apply until knowing the opinion of the aviation attorney.
 
Every other forum I have read says to disclose an expungement because the airlines have a way of finding expunged records. I've heard the horror stories of people being ripped out of training 6 weeks in due to a background check
 
thecunningone said:
I guess I should mention, and what will potentially hurt me...is before the record was expunged I traveled to Canada on leisure and got stopped at the border because my record was showing Felony theft. They brought me inside the customs and took my picture/finger printed me and then allowed me to enter. At the same time, I applied to the hospital I currently work at and their background check also showed a felony. This prompted me to get the records expunged. Again, I followed up with my state gov. as well as FBI and did the finger print check and it all came back clear. However, I think since this showed up before a was "pinged" in the system, during an airline background check I have a feeling even if the FBI comes back clear at some point I will have an issue with Canada showing it still, or potentially finding out somehow. I was able to get into nursing school/state license with my clear record but I imagine FAA and airlines are different. So, I suppose I should go for an AME and just disclose/check yes and then wait for the results and hope I obtain the medical. Do you think if I disclose in the beginning this will affect me? I understand that airlines run a 10 year FBI background check...well, by the time I am at the airlines it will be over 10 years so at that point can I legally declare no? It is interesting, but I think being explaining myself now is better than hoping they don't find something.


So many folks have mentioned the FBI check WILL find something, many people say the FBI shows expungements etc, but again my fingerprint check came back in the clear...so I don't exactly know what to do. I don't start flight school until February so maybe I should go have my medical now and just admit to it and see if I can get it taken care of?
Click to expand...

The boarder runs your arrest records; conviction, expunged, found not guilty and the police all went to jail, doesn’t matter, the arrest record and deposition will ALWAYS show.

That said not everyone can see those records, or cares, now border folks, dod clearances, buying a gun and running a nics check, those will show the above.

As for what/who your airline uses, you’d have to investigate that.

What’s important is the deposition, arrested for felony XYZ, deposed as misdemeanor XYZ vs arrested for felony XYZ, deposed felony ABC.
 
James331 said:
What’s important is the deposition, arrested for felony XYZ, deposed as misdemeanor XYZ vs arrested for felony XYZ, deposed felony ABC.
Click to expand...

90% sure you mean "disposition."

In law, "deposition" is a sworn statement given outside the courtroom (in pre-trial discovery, etc). "Disposition" is the final outcome of the case. (Disposition also means transference of property, and all of its non-law meanings. Deposition also has non-law meanings, but they are archaic and rare.)
 
mcmanigle said:
90% sure you mean "disposition."

In law, "deposition" is a sworn statement given outside the courtroom (in pre-trial discovery, etc). "Disposition" is the final outcome of the case. (Disposition also means transference of property, and all of its non-law meanings. Deposition also has non-law meanings, but they are archaic and rare.)
Click to expand...

^ that.

Point still stands.
 
In Texas, under State law, an person is only eligible for an expunction if they have been acquitted by a judge or jury, or if the charges were dismissed and the required waiting period expires, which is usually the same as the statute of limitations period for that offense. An expunction is filed in State District Court as a civil filing and receives it’s own discreet cause number while the matter is pending. Once granted, a judge issues a fully enforceable court order to all respondent law enforcement entities, local, State and Federal, commanding them to destroy all records and files of all proceedings related to the matter. All record of the unsubstantiated allegations where permanently rescinded. And then AL Gore invented the internet.
 
Daniel Biltz said:
In Texas, under State law, an person is only eligible for an expunction if they have been acquitted by a judge or jury, or if the charges were dismissed and the required waiting period expires, which is usually the same as the statute of limitations period for that offense. An expunction is filed in State District Court as a civil filing and receives it’s own discreet cause number while the matter is pending. Once granted, a judge issues a fully enforceable court order to all respondent law enforcement entities, local, State and Federal, commanding them to destroy all records and files of all proceedings related to the matter. All record of the unsubstantiated allegations where permanently rescinded. And then AL Gore invented the internet.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can explain something to me: What provision of the U.S. Constitution allows a state to 'command' the federal government to do something?
 
Full Faith and Credit Clause, Article IV, Section 1 of US Constitution
The Constitution isn’t very long. Read it sometime
 
Daniel Biltz said:
Full Faith and Credit Clause, Article IV, Section 1 of US Constitution
The Constitution isn’t very long. Read it sometime
Click to expand...

"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

The "in each State" wording suggests that it's binding on states, not the federal government. Is there case law to the contrary that you can cite?
 
mcmanigle said:
90% sure you mean "disposition."

In law, "deposition" is a sworn statement given outside the courtroom (in pre-trial discovery, etc). "Disposition" is the final outcome of the case. (Disposition also means transference of property, and all of its non-law meanings. Deposition also has non-law meanings, but they are archaic and rare.)
Click to expand...


Sorry! Yes I meant disposition!
 
Palmpilot said:
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

The "in each State" wording suggests that it's binding on states, not the federal government. Is there case law to the contrary that you can cite?
Click to expand...

Correct; the Full Faith and Credit Clause means that one state has to respect the records and proceedings of other states. Otherwise if you got married or owned land in one state, and then moved to another state, that second state could say "you have to get married again here" or "our inheritance proceedings don't recognize that land deed filed in another state."

Contrast this with the Supremacy Clause, which specifies that federal law derived from constitutional powers overrides state law.

Article VI Clause 2 said:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
 
I believe there’s statutory authority governs this issue. 28 USC section something or another if I’m not mistaken. If you’re an attorney and this is a genuine inquiry and you have Lexus/Westlaw I can give a cite. I’m sure a Wikipedia search would get you started and you can shepardize to find the progeny most on point. If none of the above makes sense, then consult a lawyer. None of the above is to be construed as legal advice.
 
Daniel Biltz said:
I believe there’s statutory authority governs this issue. 28 USC section something or another if I’m not mistaken. If you’re an attorney and this is a genuine inquiry and you have Lexus/Westlaw I can give a cite.
Click to expand...

The U.S. Code is available free on line.

https://uscode.house.gov/

If none of the above makes sense, then consult a lawyer. None of the above is to be construed as legal advice.
Click to expand...

You want me to hire a lawyer to settle an Internet discussion? Yeah, sure, whatever you say. ;)
 
Last edited:
You are better to disclose what happened and show how you are better for the experience. If you do not disclose it then try to argue that it was (or should have been expunged) will cast doubt on your integrity. Avoid putting yourself in a bad light or causing the other party to question your motives.

Should you ever need access to classified information the feds will look at everything and they can penetrate sealed or expunged records. You do not want the person completing your investigation to have ANY reason to suspect you of anything untoward. Unfortunately, the organizations responsible for these investigations operate under their own rules which seem to be modeled on the Napoleonic Code of Justice (you are guilty of whatever until you exonerate yourself).
 
jonvcaples said:
You are better to disclose what happened and show how you are better for the experience. If you do not disclose it then try to argue that it was (or should have been expunged) will cast doubt on your integrity. Avoid putting yourself in a bad light or causing the other party to question your motives.

Should you ever need access to classified information the feds will look at everything and they can penetrate sealed or expunged records. You do not want the person completing your investigation to have ANY reason to suspect you of anything untoward. Unfortunately, the organizations responsible for these investigations operate under their own rules which seem to be modeled on the Napoleonic Code of Justice (you are guilty of whatever until you exonerate yourself).
Click to expand...

was OP looking at a DoD contract or to work for some 121?

Dont make issues where there aint none

Know before you go

Dude needs to get more information to have a clear picture of what he should, or should not, do.
 
Yes this dude flew 121 and was an intelligence officer in the Navy and held much higher clearances and accesses as an engineer for Martin-Marietta. If you have to cleared for government work life is much better if there are NO issues. You want to be totally upfront and transparent. Why? Because they can and will look at everything and are very dogged in pursuing any discrepancy no matter how trivial.

Quick example. I was cleared through the Navy then again as a civilian. The investigator busted my chops because I had two personal history forms but they were not identical. The ONLY difference was one showed me as LT Jon Caples (grade at the time) and the other showed me as Mr. Jon Caples. All the information (dates, times, residence) was exactly the same.
 
Same comment I made on the Red Board.

Disclosure on the medical (and ATP) app is a mixed legal and medical question.

The FAA is clear it wants information on expunged convictions. That's in the MedXpress instructions.

The effect of a state expungement on a federal application, at least as of when I last began to research it a year it two ago, has no clear answer from federal appellate courts. Plus, depending on the applicable expungement statute or procedure, expunged doesn't necessarily mean gone for all purposes. So the legal piece is a risk analysis of history, official records, specific state procedures, etc... That is highly personalized advice, not a good subject for SGOTI, not even SLOTI.

The medical piece is, if disclosed, what are the consequences to medical certification?. One cannot do an effective legal risk/benefit analysis without knowing the medical piece also.

And yes, people have become airline pilots with past convictions, even ones which have not been expunged. That's a question for an aviation career counselor.
 
Last edited:
I look at it a bit more towards the risk element. What happens if you don't disclose and get caught: likely lose medical, pilot certificates, and job - with the downside risk that you get charged with falsifying government statements. What happens if you disclose? Some questions are asked, you're considered truthful - the downside risk is that you're disqualified or don't get job. What happens if you don't disclose and don't get caught? Might get medical and job, but always looking over shoulder about whether the past will catch up with you (and if it does, you've been caught).

Since folks have gotten medicals and flying jobs even with convictions long in their past, it seems to me that the lower risk is to disclose. I might find out first what crimes are disqualifying (for example, there are some that disqualify you for security reasons and disqualify you from SIDA access). If it's a "no big deal" in terms of FAA certification and licensing, what's the downside to disclosing?
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
Now I am even more curious. I can see how they might get away with this for immigration. But for US citizens it seems one might be able to make a due process argument against a person with a true expungement having to disclose.

It appears that specific government agencies can demand such disclosure if that is specifically authorized by law.

I would be very interested to hear the case law on this. A quick google search did not show an answer regarding the FAA.
Click to expand...
It's broader than the FAA and there is pretty much nothing solid.

In the aviation arena, the limited NTSB case law is all over the place. The question has come up a few times in the context of certificate revocation for falsifying the application. But in every one of the cases I've read, there wasn't really an expunction to begin with - the pilot only thought there was, was "told" there was, or expected, one. There is "dictum" (language which was not needed for the decision, so it is not precedent) in those cases saying if there were a real state expunction, it would be honored and dictum saying it would not. And even then, that's only on the intentional falsification issue, not on, say an action on the medical certificate for not meeting requirements.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It's broader than the FAA and there is pretty much nothing solid.
Click to expand...

Yes. Hope the OP has been able to consult an aviation attorney to advise him on the risks in his case.

It is interesting how basically all laws and regulations have their edge cases.
 
mcmanigle said:
Correct; the Full Faith and Credit Clause means that one state has to respect the records and proceedings of other states. Otherwise if you got married or owned land in one state, and then moved to another state, that second state could say "you have to get married again here" or "our inheritance proceedings don't recognize that land deed filed in another state."

Contrast this with the Supremacy Clause, which specifies that federal law derived from constitutional powers overrides state law.
Click to expand...

But there's also the Tenth Amendment, which would seem (among other things) to give a state the right to expunge its own records as it sees fit. There's also a common-sense argument that if FedGov is going to base a licensing decision upon a State record, of a State conviction, of a State crime, tried in a State court, by a State judge, then it should also honor that State's decision to expunge said record.

In reality, I suspect that that's what happens most of the time, anyway. If properly disclosed, I doubt FAA or any other Federal agency would take a tough stance against an applicant whose conviction was expunged, pardoned, sealed, etc., as long as it is disclosed.

Rich
 
i spoke with an AOPA attorney and he said to absolutely disclose it on the FAA medical. He said it should affect me getting a medical and if it does it will only take a few months longer. He said to go ahead and get a class 1 and see if I can, that a regional will likely hire me, but a major may potentially be a problem
 
RJM62 said:
But there's also the Tenth Amendment, which would seem (among other things) to give a state the right to expunge its own records as it sees fit. There's also a common-sense argument that if FedGov is going to base a licensing decision upon a State record, of a State conviction, of a State crime, tried in a State court, by a State judge, then it should also honor that State's decision to expunge said record.

In reality, I suspect that that's what happens most of the time, anyway. If properly disclosed, I doubt FAA or any other Federal agency would take a tough stance against an applicant whose conviction was expunged, pardoned, sealed, etc., as long as it is disclosed.

Rich
Click to expand...
Ideally, that is what should happen. In the state where I do expunction work, expunction of convictions is not automatic. They are of less serious crimes, single offenses, and they require judicial decisions after considering character affidavits and any objections by prosecutors. One would hope the FAA would take that into consideration. OTOH, drug offenses (not DUIs) are expungeable, but I doubt the FAA would forego making its own safety analysis.
 
RJM62 said:
But there's also the Tenth Amendment, which would seem (among other things) to give a state the right to expunge its own records as it sees fit.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone claim that states can't expunge their own records. The issue in this thread, as I understand it, is whether the FAA has a legal leg to stand on in requiring applicants to disclose expunged actions.

There's also a common-sense argument that if FedGov is going to base a licensing decision upon a State record, of a State conviction, of a State crime, tried in a State court, by a State judge, then it should also honor that State's decision to expunge said record.
Click to expand...

I understood Mark to be saying that the case law on this is not clear and consistent.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
I haven't seen anyone claim that states can't expunge their own records. The issue in this thread, as I understand it, is whether the FAA has a legal leg to stand on in requiring applicants to disclose expunged actions.



I understood Mark to be saying that the case law on this not clear and consistent.
Click to expand...
Correct. The real FAA issue isn't the fact of conviction, it is what having committed an offense means in terms of attitude, conformity to legal requirements, etc.
 
Constitution? We don't need no steeennkeeng constitution......
 
Thecunningone said:
He said to go ahead and get a class 1 and see if I can, that a regional will likely hire me, but a major may potentially be a problem
Click to expand...

If airline 1 doesn't want you, go to airline b. Someone will take you. And there are different options besides major airlines to make a living flying airplanes.
 
bbchien said:
From the MedXpress User Guide:
"If the record of a conviction has been expunged, state the date that the record was expunged and the court that ordered the expunction."

Lie at your peril.
Click to expand...

Agreed

Thus run your own background and see whats up

Not sure if the FAA checks arrest records, only takes one nut ball to do a nut ball thing and the public to get mad at the FAA, the FAA decides to "do something" because they fear the public and now they check another database, al la youre established at your airline and you get a not so friendly letter from the FAA and its curtains.

You need to know what there is to find, and address anything they could, maybe not today, but one day find. Again we live and die by the databases these days.
 
Palmpilot said:
I understood Mark to be saying that the case law on this is not clear and consistent.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It appears there has never been a case on precisely this issue.

Related cases suggest that the FAA will want to see the expunged record and that is in their MedExpress guide. If discovered, they might choose to bring an enforcement action, but there is no record of having done so.

The NTSB might accept a defense that a truly expunged record does not have to be disclosed when an appeal gets there, but they may not. Their record indicates they may incline to not.

There is no appellate court case beyond the NTSB dealing with it, which is where any constitutional issue could be raised. The Federal sentencing guidelines respect state level expungement, which suggests there might be an argument there.

Cost of going to appellate court would likely be $100k or more.

So it might be an interesting case from an academic legal perspective, to resolve the issue. But I see the OP has received the practical advice to not try and be the example case, since it likely won’t be a huge deal in terms of career.
 
If this is the same guy from the Red board, it should be important to note that he had a "judicial diversion" in Tennessee, which is NOT a conviction. Since it's not a case involving drugs or alcohol or a motor vehicle action, it is not required to be reported on either the medical or in any other security check the FAA does (in fact, the FAA doesn't ASK the applicants for security information, it requires the operators to conduct background checks).

The expungement here is not of a conviction (which he doesn't have), but of the records that he was charged at all. Most employers are barred from asking about arrests that do not result in convictions (in some cases, they're not allowed to ask even about convictions).
 
flyingron said:
The expungement here is not of a conviction (which he doesn't have), but of the records that he was charged at all.
Click to expand...

That aspect makes this a bit more complicated yet. There is a distinction between a diversion with admission of guilt and one without any such admission in many treatments of diversion.

I believe the OP here stated that it was a diversion with admission of guilt. That tends to be treated more like a conviction in many cases.

Nonetheless, it would be a test case if the OP chose to test it by not admitting as demanded by the FAA’s instructions, as there is no clear case law.

I believe the OP has been advised to do the practical thing and admit it on the form and not become the test case.
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
That aspect makes this a bit more complicated yet. There is a distinction between a diversion with admission of guilt and one without any such admission in many treatments of diversion.

I believe the OP here stated that it was a diversion with admission of guilt. That tends to be treated more like a conviction in many cases.

Nonetheless, it would be a test case if the OP chose to test it by not admitting as demanded by the FAA’s instructions, as there is no clear case law.

I believe the OP has been advised to do the practical thing and admit it on the form and not become the test case.
Click to expand...
There was in Massachusetts judicial diversions, for example a "continuance with a finding" of guilt and a "continuance without a finding."
 
PeterNSteinmetz said:
That aspect makes this a bit more complicated yet. There is a distinction between a diversion with admission of guilt and one without any such admission in many treatments of diversion.
Click to expand...
There's no admission of guilt. It's a conditional plea that gets changed to not guilty.
It would be a different thing if he had been convicted and expunged, or convicted and dismissed or whatever, but the judicial diversion is specifically designed to avoid any indication of guilt.
 
So if the OP consults a competent attorney who is licensed to practice in his state, and that attorney examines the relevant records and determines that there was no conviction, it would seem that the correct thing to do would be to answer "no" to the question of whether he had a conviction. (Disclaimer: I'm not an attorney.)
 
midlifeflyer said:
There was in Massachusetts judicial diversions, for example a "continuance with a finding" of guilt and a "continuance without a finding."
Click to expand...
But again, that is entirely irrelevant. People have been crucifying this guy on both forums with completely uninformed and inaccurate answers. Tennesee judicial diversion has a definite meaning and I indicated what that was.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top