Anyone Ever Get Turned Down for Global Entry?

I would think you would be ok. The application specifically asks for you to list "convictions" and not "arrests". They might bring it up at the interview but once again, an arrest is not a conviction. I think as long as you are open about it, you'll be fine.

Yes, I also received the same vague reasons on the denial letter for my "appeal".

I have another friend (different from the one I mentioned earlier in this thread) who wants to apply for GE. In 2009 he plead guilty in Washington state to negligent driving in the first degree, a misdemeanor. There was alcohol involved and this was a plea bargain due to it being a first offense with no other record. This surely qualifies as a criminal conviction that needs to be disclosed.

The question is... will this be an automatic decline? It seems they're forgiving about some criminal offenses.. there are examples in this thread. Anyone want to venture a guess?

I'd like to second what another poster wrote and caution readers that the post below is inaccurate. I think mileena's heart is in the right place but how this stuff works - and the terms used - vary greatly from state to state. It is impossible to make a blanket statement "this is how expungements work" or "this is the difference between a citation and an arrest." I can't emphasize enough the 50 different ways these situations are referred to and treated.

People run into trouble because while the 50 states treat expungements (for example) 50 different ways, federal investigators usually treat them one way. They have their matrix and if box X is checked then consequence Y happens. My impression is that GE and NEXUS is such a high volume operation that if your case ticks box X then you're out of luck because it is largely an automated process.

In other situations - applying for a security clearance, for example - investigators have good knowledge of the state they are dealing with and applicants have a greater opportunity to explain past events and mitigate any negative information.

If a citizen planned to apply for GE or NEXUS and has an expungement or deferred judgment in their past, it might be worthwhile to hire an attorney who deals with GE to perhaps ease the process.

Climbing up on my soapbox, this is all the result of living in a digitized world where nothing is forgotten. "Back in the day" a citizen would receive an expungement or deferred judgment - then and now only with a a judge's blessing - and be able to move forward in life with a new start. That citizen could truthfully answer "no" on a job application when asked if he had been committed of a crime. Thanks to the proliferation of court and law enforcement databases, that arrest from 1990 never goes away. And so many agencies - from ICE down to your state bar association - have carved out exceptions to being able to truthfully state "no, I was never convicted of a crime" that an expungement isn't worth nearly what it used to be.

Back off the soapbox.

I'm sorry, I have nothing at all of substance to add to this thread...I just found this to be amusing.

I thought the stated standard was:
1) Any felony
2) A misdemeanor in the past 10 years.

It is also clear that customs violations also likely result in rejection, as does a failure to disclose any crime.

Based on this, a misdemeanor 3 years ago means rejection is likely.

Yes I would agree... but the good news is that in Washington state you can have a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor (with some exceptions) vacated after 3 years if certain criteria are met. My friend has met all the criteria so before applying for GE he's going to go through that process and have his negligent driving conviction vacated. Then he can answer the "have you ever been convicted" question "no" on the GE application.

I thought I'd post this info in case it's helpful for someone else.

This paragraph is taken from the Washington state courts instructions on how to get a conviction vacated:

"Vacation of a conviction releases you from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense. Once a conviction is vacated, the fact that you have been convicted of the offense shall not be included in your criminal history for purposes of determining a sentence in any subsequent conviction. For all purposes, including responding to questions on employment or housing applications, a person whose conviction has been vacated may state that he or she has never been convicted of that crime. Vacation of a conviction, however, does not affect or prevent use of the conviction in a later criminal prosecution."

Just got told I was denied at my interview at DFW. Of course he could give me no reason and I should contact the CBP ombudsman. This application was done through the FLUX alliance because I'm Dutch. I had already completed the interview in Amsterdam and their advice was positive. As far as I know I have never violated any laws in the US besides being pulled over for speeding 10 miles 6 years ago. This only resulted in a warning and should not affect anything. I have been pulled aside for secondaries and custom inspections a few times, but they never found anything wrong. The thing is that I regularly get SSSS on my boarding passes too, but I always thought I got those because I usually book very last minute. Just want to add that I have travelled between the EU and US for 40+ times and I have no idea what could be the reason of the denial.
Anyone here that successfully used FLUX, or do they just deny all Dutch citizens because they assume we smoke pot all day?

Washington's statement is not binding on the feds. They can define "conviction" differently from the State of Washington and refuse to honor it. We face that issue in deportation cases all the time. A state court order vacating a conviction based on rehabilitation or to avoid deportation consequences of a conviction will not be respected by Homeland Security. Many years ago, this was also the case with firearm rights as well, but Congress statutorily overruled the US Supreme Court ruling.

What further complicates this mess is that they don't always catch sheltered convictions so many of us know people who have a sheltered conviction and a Nexus card.

Lastly, there is at least one Washington Attorney General's opinion that confuses me. It seems to say that the someone who has their conviction vacated may not be able to own a gun:

http://www.atg.wa.gov/AGOOpinions/op...0#.US5_x6V82fQ
.

Additionally, Washington offenders with vacated domestic violence convictions can't own firearms under the federal law because they are still convicted within the meaning of the Lautenberg Act:

http://www.washrecord.com/Fed%20v%20WA.htm

I had an almost denial that turned positive in the end.

Many moons ago, someone (not me!) committed a crime by breaking into a computer I owned and then using it to commit another crime.

This brought a bunch of men in suits to my house to confiscate my computer and I ended up going for a polygraph test, etc. In the end, it took about a year, but I got all my stuff back and the perpetrator of said crime was never located. I was, of course, never charged with a crime, never arrested, and never committed a crime.

Anywho - when the CBP agent asked if I had even been arrested or convicted of a crime, I said no. He then called me a liar and said I was trying to hide this investigation from him. When I said 'no, sir, you asked about arrests and convictions which of course I have never been' he then berated me about how GE is a program all about trust and how untrustworthy he thinks I am.

All I could think of was Arlo Guthrie and the Group W bench. And at least Arlo actually DID something wrong!! All I've got is an investigation of a crime that was committed against myself and a third party!

The net-net is that, thankfully, I was able to provide him with the name of the government representative who conducted said investigation many years ago, and he turned the whole thing over to his supervisor.

I got approved about 5 hours later, but the entire drive home, I was furious that I may not be moral enough to join GE because of a crime that was committed against me! Not to mention how insulting the CBP agent was ...

Not a pleasant experience but I'm happy to have my GE card.

This is good info, thanks. I just applied for NEXUS and was wondering what would happen, since I have a misdemeanor (underage possession of alcohol) from way back in 2000. I figured the US side would be fine since it was a long time ago and it never impacted a security clearance. I'm hoping Canada feels the same. Does anyone have any data points on how Canada feels about relatively minor misdemeanors from over 10 years ago?

Otherwise, it sounds like my wife and kid will be using NEXUS/Pre-Check while I wait in line!

How old were you when you were cited for underage drinking?

The drinking age across most of Canada is 19, 18 in Alberta, Manitoba, and Quebec. See http://www.ccsa.ca/eng/topics/legisl...s/default.aspx .

I would suspect if you were doing something which is not even a crime anywhere in Canada (drinking while 19), this might weigh in your favor.

If you were 18 you might want to do your interview in Alberta, Manitoba, or Quebec.

I was 18. I wasn't too worried about the interview as much as being screened out before that step on the Canadian side. I know they take DUIs and such very seriously, and often don't let people enter, but I wasn't sure if that extended to all alcohol-related crimes/offenses. Thankfully, there's no domestic tie or link to a vehicle, I was just stopped while walking back to my dorm in college.

I'll probably be doing my interview at YUL just because it's about the same distance from the Houlton, ME, border crossing, and probably a ton more interesting to do as a family weekend trip. It definitely wouldn't have been a crime in Quebec, there wasn't a disorderly or anything like that attached to it.

Should I disclose a sealed juvenile misdemanor in NYS (NYC) from when I was 15?

You should disclose anything. The officer will likely ignore it, because you were 15. If you don't disclose, you run the chance of the officer not ignoring the fact that you didn't disclose. From my understanding, sealed means they cannot see what the issue was, however, they can see that something was sealed (as opposed to expunged).