Revealing expunged misdemeanor?

[hawruh]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[baxt1412]

Might be best to contact a lawyer. You are applying to a program leading to professional licensure and technically I'm sure there is still a record of this somewhere even though it was expunged. It would be best to disclose it, but I am no lawyer.

 

[DrPibble]

Directly from the TUCOM-CA secondary:

"Have you ever been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, even if the conviction was sealed, expunged, or otherwise removed from your record? Please note: Misdemeanors DO NOT need to be reported UNLESS you are applying to a program leading to professional licensure, as any criminal conviction may interfere with your ability to become licensed.*"

Not gonna get super specific but I was involved in a certain incident when I was 17 involving fire. It was expunged before I was 18 and I haven't thought about it since.

And now this secondary is asking me to disclose it? I thought it wasn't even possible for anyone to see this record...? Did anyone run into this.

Usually the background checks can see any court decision, regardless of the length of time that has elapsed, expungement status, etc. I doubt it will affect you as it happened when you were a minor, but I would provide full disclosure. It might be a good idea to call anonymously and ask.

 

[Awesome Sauceome]

Disclose and then use the space provided to explain it. Crap happens, people are all young and reckless at one point or another, they understand that. If you can eloquently state the problem and the significant growth since that time, there will be absolutely no problem.

If you do not disclose and they find out (either now or during background checks once you are enrolled) you can have your acceptance taken away and might even be black marked at a lot of other institutions.

 

[AlteredScale]

Disclose and then use the space provided to explain it. Crap happens, people are all young and reckless at one point or another, they understand that. If you can eloquently state the problem and the significant growth since that time, there will be absolutely no problem.

If you do not disclose and they find out (either now or during background checks once you are enrolled) you can have your acceptance taken away and might even be black marked at a lot of other institutions.

Agreed, better to be asked about it at an interview because you were honest then hide it and have the school run a check and defer your acceptance one week into orientation.

 

[D4C]

A expunged misdemeanor shouldn't show up on the check they run for incoming students. Getting your licence is a different story though.

 

[gyngyn]

A expunged misdemeanor shouldn't show up on the check they run for incoming students. Getting your licence is a different story though.

Depending on the organization running the check, both juvenile and "expunged" records show up on background checks. That is why many medical schools have specific questions in the secondary that request this information. The student must be able to get a badge at affiliating hospitals.

 

[GreyF0X]

Depending on the organization running the check, both juvenile and "expunged" records show up on background checks. That is why many medical schools have specific questions in the secondary that request this information. The student must be able to get a badge at affiliating hospitals.

So for some it is pointless to go through the process of getting your record expunged, essentially?

 

[noleknight16]

In my state, you do not have to disclose expunged offenses to schools, but you will have to report it to a state medical licensing board.

 

[gyngyn]

So for some it is pointless to go through the process of getting your record expunged, essentially?

Depending on the level of security required for your education or training and depending on the offense, it may still be worthwhile.

 

[noleknight16]

Looks like California works the same (assuming your issue happened there):

http://freshstartlawcenter.com/when...ose-an-expunged-conviction-in-california.html

California Penal Code 1203.4 has only carved out three very focused circumstances under which you must disclose your prior convictions:

1. If contracting with the CA State Lottery Commission. This is obviously extremely narrow and is not applicable for most people.
2. When applying for public office. This means if you ever want to run for city council, mayor, or governor you will have to disclose the prior expunged convictions.
3. When applying for a state license. This is true for any state license you might be applying for, including a license to practice law in California, etc.

So you would not be in the wrong for saying no to that question. You do not have to disclose to them.

 

[yanks26dmb]

I was

Looks like California works the same (assuming your issue happened there):

http://freshstartlawcenter.com/when...ose-an-expunged-conviction-in-california.html

California Penal Code 1203.4 has only carved out three very focused circumstances under which you must disclose your prior convictions:

1. If contracting with the CA State Lottery Commission. This is obviously extremely narrow and is not applicable for most people.
2. When applying for public office. This means if you ever want to run for city council, mayor, or governor you will have to disclose the prior expunged convictions.
3. When applying for a state license. This is true for any state license you might be applying for, including a license to practice law in California, etc.

So you would not be in the wrong for saying no to that question. You do not have to disclose to them.

I was charged with a misdemeanor but not convicted as the charges were eventually dismissed.

If I read this correctly I did NOT need to say yes here bc this question is asking about convictions...right?

 

[DrPibble]

Looks like California works the same (assuming your issue happened there):

http://freshstartlawcenter.com/when...ose-an-expunged-conviction-in-california.html

California Penal Code 1203.4 has only carved out three very focused circumstances under which you must disclose your prior convictions:

1. If contracting with the CA State Lottery Commission. This is obviously extremely narrow and is not applicable for most people.
2. When applying for public office. This means if you ever want to run for city council, mayor, or governor you will have to disclose the prior expunged convictions.
3. When applying for a state license. This is true for any state license you might be applying for, including a license to practice law in California, etc.

So you would not be in the wrong for saying no to that question. You do not have to disclose to them.

You interpreted this incorrectly. It gives the three circumstances under which you MUST disclose prior convictions. And then it includes "applying for a state license" as one of those required circumstances.

OP- answer the question honestly. It is better to be honest and provide full disclosure. Again, if you're concerned, you should call the school and simply ask them their policy on this to clarify. You don't need to give your name or anything.

 

[noleknight16]

You interpreted this incorrectly. It gives the three circumstances under which you MUST disclose prior convictions. And then it includes "applying for a state license" as one of those required circumstances.

OP- answer the question honestly. It is better to be honest and provide full disclosure. Again, if you're concerned, you should call the school and simply ask them their policy on this to clarify. You don't need to give your name or anything.

I am not wrong about that. You can say no when the school asks you, but when you actually go to apply for a license you must then disclose to the state medical board.

 

[noleknight16]

I was


I was charged with a misdemeanor but not convicted as the charges were eventually dismissed.

If I read this correctly I did NOT need to say yes here bc this question is asking about convictions...right?

Not sure, sounds like they only want convictions but you'd need to clarify that with the school. Get the arrest/charge expunged if you haven't already.

 

[FutureDrB]

So for some it is pointless to go through the process of getting your record expunged, essentially?

I posted about this to a great extent before. At least here in Texas, yes, an expungement and even a pardon and expungement is pointless. Any state licensing body (medical, law, teaching, etc.) will still see it.

I have a record too from my early years and get to go through the whole explanation process. Yay.

 

[DrPibble]

I am not wrong about that. You can say no when the school asks you, but when you actually go to apply to a license you must then disclose to the state medical board.

Right, but you are suggesting that the OP answer "no" to this question despite the explicit instruction to give info for ALL convictions, regardless of whether they have been expunged or sealed. Because he/she is applying for a professional program that will require the application for a professional license (as stated in the question), it would be in OP's best interest to answer the question as posed- i.e. to give the info that they are asking for.

Again, if you're concerned OP, call the school up.

 

[noleknight16]

Right, but you are suggesting that the OP answer "no" to this question despite the explicit instruction to give info for ALL convictions, regardless of whether they have been expunged or sealed. Because he/she is applying for a professional program that will require the application for a professional license (as stated in the question), it would be in OP's best interest to answer the question as posed- i.e. to give the info that they are asking for.

Again, if you're concerned OP, call the school up.

Since the school is not an entity you must disclose to (regardless of how they ask the question), the OP can say no to the question. If the state licensing board asks the OP why they put 'yes' on their application for their license and 'no' on the med school app (if the board even reviews it in the first place), citing the appropriate statutes is valid and the OP shouldn't be punished for that at all. I think it's in the OPs best interest to disclose only when absolutely required.

 

[Goro]

If a school asks if you have any arrests, convictions or misdemeanors, what part of that don't you understand?

Secondaries frequently ask for this type of info, and the advice you're giving is a good way for someone to get their acceptance rescinded!

Medical schools do not want to have graduates who can't practice Medicine!

OP wasn't convicted, so I agree s/he doesn't have to disclose.

Since the school is not an entity you must disclose to (regardless of how they ask the question), the OP can say no to the question. If the state licensing board asks the OP why they put 'yes' on their application for their license and 'no' on the med school app (if the board even reviews it in the first place), citing the appropriate statutes is valid and the OP shouldn't be punished for that at all. I think it's in the OPs best interest to disclose only when absolutely required.

 

[noleknight16]

If a school asks if you have any arrests, convictions or misdemeanors, what part of that don't you understand?

Secondaries frequently ask for this type of info, and the advice you're giving is a good way for someone to get their acceptance rescinded!

Medical schools do not want to have graduates who can't practice Medicine!

OP wasn't convicted, so I agree s/he doesn't have to disclose.

It's not that simple though. I understand that it would be a waste of time and money for both the student and school if barred from licensure, but a medical school is not an entity entitled to that information. The applicant can legally deny/fail to acknowledge an expunged record when asked unless the entity asking falls under the statute. Why should a school fault the applicant for saying no when they were exercising their legal right to do so?

I think that was another poster asking a question who wasn't convicted. I don't think the OP told us if they were or not.

 

[DrPibble]

It's not that simple though. I understand that it would be a waste of time and money for both the student and school if barred from licensure, but a medical school is not an entity entitled to that information. The applicant can legally deny/fail to acknowledge an expunged record when asked unless the entity asking falls under the statute. Why should a school fault the applicant for saying no when they were exercising their legal right to do so?

I think that was another poster asking a question who wasn't convicted. I don't think the OP told us if they were or not.

Thank you @Goro, I absolutely agree and am glad you offered your relevant, highly-respected opinion on this matter.

I believe there are many reasons why medical schools specifically ask for this information. For one, like @gyngyn mentioned above, prior convictions could cause issues in obtaining permission to rotate and proceed with clinical education at the school's affiliated hospitals. As was also mentioned, schools can use services that detect any court decision on one's record- despite expungement, sealed youth convictions, dismissals, etc. Fingerprinting will also show prior arrests, even if dismissed.
So, if one were to answer this question dishonestly (in accordance with those statutes outlined above), such charges could still appear on the background checks upon admission. While OP may have the "legal right" to withhold this information from the entities not listed above (not sure this is the case since we're dealing with a professional-level institution; I have no idea), it doesn't mean it's a wise idea to do so. Those charges can & will be used against him/her if they are intentionally omitted when asked.

When dealing with professional school applications, I firmly believe that honesty is incredibly important. Especially considering that OP was 17 when this incident happened. To the OP- I have a misdemeanor on my record from 2 years ago. It is in the expungement process, but I disclosed it and wrote an honest, remorseful explanation detailing what I've learned and how I've grown. I've received one interview from a great DO school and am hopeful for more this cycle. So this minor thing from your teenage years will hardly hold you back (unless, of course, it was extremely serious or violent...).

 

[laricb]

I was


I was charged with a misdemeanor but not convicted as the charges were eventually dismissed.

If I read this correctly I did NOT need to say yes here bc this question is asking about convictions...right?

When your charged with something it will show up on a search

 

[noleknight16]

Thank you @Goro, I absolutely agree and am glad you offered your relevant, highly-respected opinion on this matter.

I believe there are many reasons why medical schools specifically ask for this information. For one, like @gyngyn mentioned above, prior convictions could cause issues in obtaining permission to rotate and proceed with clinical education at the school's affiliated hospitals. As was also mentioned, schools can use services that detect any court decision on one's record- despite expungement, sealed youth convictions, dismissals, etc. Fingerprinting will also show prior arrests, even if dismissed.
So, if one were to answer this question dishonestly (in accordance with those statutes outlined above), such charges could still appear on the background checks upon admission. While OP may have the "legal right" to withhold this information from the entities not listed above (not sure this is the case since we're dealing with a professional-level institution; I have no idea), it doesn't mean it's a wise idea to do so. Those charges can & will be used against him/her if they are intentionally omitted when asked.

When dealing with professional school applications, I firmly believe that honesty is incredibly important. Especially considering that OP was 17 when this incident happened. To the OP- I have a misdemeanor on my record from 2 years ago. It is in the expungement process, but I disclosed it and wrote an honest, remorseful explanation detailing what I've learned and how I've grown. I've received one interview from a great DO school and am hopeful for more this cycle. So this minor thing from your teenage years will hardly hold you back (unless, of course, it was extremely serious or violent...).

I see being essentially forced to disclose in circumstances not included in the statute to be unfair and it defeats the purpose of an expungement in the first place. Applying to a professional school isn't listed as a circumstance. Nobody should be punished or have it used against them for following the law as written. Calling a 'no' answer dishonest in this situation is off-base.

 

[yanks26dmb]

When your charged with something it will show up on a search

I know that. But sometimes questions ask about charges and other times they ask about convictions. My attorney told me I do not have to answer yes unless I am asked about charges.

I was primarily wondering if everyone else read this question as I did; pertaining to convictions and not charges.

 

[yanks26dmb]

If a school asks if you have any arrests, convictions or misdemeanors, what part of that don't you understand?

Secondaries frequently ask for this type of info, and the advice you're giving is a good way for someone to get their acceptance rescinded!

Medical schools do not want to have graduates who can't practice Medicine!

OP wasn't convicted, so I agree s/he doesn't have to disclose.

I realize I'm probably beating this to death....but if a question only mentions convictions and a person has only been charged, with those charges later dismissed, there is no need to answer yes..?

 

[noleknight16]

I know that. But sometimes questions ask about charges and other times they ask about convictions. My attorney told me I do not have to answer yes unless I am asked about charges.

I was primarily wondering if everyone else read this question as I did; pertaining to convictions and not charges.

I read it the same way you did. Call the school and make sure though.

 

[gyngyn]

I realize I'm probably beating this to death....but if a question only mentions convictions and a person has only been charged, with those charges later dismissed, there is no need to answer yes..?

If you are only asked about convictions, and you were not convicted, answer no.
If you are asked about charges or arrest in the secondary, answer yes and explain. If you are asked specifically about charges or arrests and answer no (believing that you are not obligated since they were juvenile or expunged) you may have your acceptance rescinded. Schools closely affiliated with government hospitals often include the ability to be educated in these hospitals under the terms of your acceptance. If you cannot get a badge, you cannot be a student. Knowing about the potential for such conflicts allows the school to intervene on your behalf before the background check. When the school is blindsided by nondisclosure there are avoidable bad outcomes.

 

[DrPibble]

I see being essentially forced to disclose in circumstances not included in the statute to be unfair and it defeats the purpose of an expungement in the first place. Applying to a professional school isn't listed as a circumstance. Nobody should be punished or have it used against them for following the law as written. Calling a 'no' answer dishonest in this situation is off-base.

Okay, I understand that you're very adamant about this. Multiple people have weighed in here, including two adcoms, who have all agreed that when asked, these issues should be disclosed honestly. It may or may not be "fair" in your opinion but it is what it is.

If the question was simply stated "Have you ever been convicted of a misdemeanor/felony?" like it usually is on an employment application, then one should absolutely answer "no" to that if they've had it expunged. But the fact of the matter remains that admissions committees deliberately ask for everything- charges, dismissals, arrests, youth offenses, expungements, etc. (although the levels of detail vary per application). They have legitimate reasons. And if one is being asked to this level of detail, then one should answer accordingly like @Goro said above.

 

[noleknight16]

If you are only asked about convictions, and you were not convicted, answer no.
If you are asked specifically about charges or arrests and answer no (believing that you are not obligated since they were juvenile or expunged) you may have your acceptance rescinded. Schools closely affiliated with government hospitals often include the ability to be educated in these hospitals under the terms of your acceptance. If you cannot get a badge, you cannot be a student. Knowing about the potential for such conflicts allows the school to intervene on your behalf before the background check. When the school is blindsided by nondisclosure there are avoidable bad outcomes.

I still do not understand the act of rescinding acceptances for a perfectly legal answer by an applicant. Is there no way for the student or school to set up a rotation alternative to cover all possible scenarios? Also, why can't expunged arrests/charges/convictions be disclosed after acceptance, therefore eliminating any potential bias towards them before a decision is made? That way, the purpose of expungements is still in tact and the school/student has two years to properly intervene or adjust for rotations if necessary.

What expungable crimes would bar entry to a government hospital anyways? Most of the serious crimes aren't expungable in the first place.

 

[gyngyn]

I still do not understand the act of rescinding acceptances for a perfectly legal answer by an applicant. Is there no way for the student or school to set up a rotation alternative to cover all possible scenarios? Also, why can't expunged arrests/charges/convictions be disclosed after acceptance, therefore eliminating any potential bias towards them before a decision is made? That way, the purpose of expungements is still in tact and the school/student has two years to properly intervene or adjust for rotations if necessary.

What expungable crimes would bar entry to a government hospital anyways? Most of the serious crimes aren't expungable in the first place.

There are two reasons that could be given for revoking acceptance. The first is that disclosure was requested and not given. There is no right to a medical education. It is a profession. As such, we may (and do) ask for more from our members than can be legally requested for non-professional training or employment (just like pilots, FBI agents...). In most cases the charges themselves would not be associated with problems, but crimes of moral turpitude are another matter.

 

[costales]

If you want to be a doctor, follow the rules.

 

[yanks26dmb]

If you are only asked about convictions, and you were not convicted, answer no.
If you are asked about charges or arrest in the secondary, answer yes and explain. If you are asked specifically about charges or arrests and answer no (believing that you are not obligated since they were juvenile or expunged) you may have your acceptance rescinded. Schools closely affiliated with government hospitals often include the ability to be educated in these hospitals under the terms of your acceptance. If you cannot get a badge, you cannot be a student. Knowing about the potential for such conflicts allows the school to intervene on your behalf before the background check. When the school is blindsided by nondisclosure there are avoidable bad outcomes.

Thank you for that. This makes me feel better as this is what I've been doing. I've answered yes on the majority but there have been a couple where I've felt OK answering no, such as with touro ca.

 

[hawruh]

.

 

[hawruh]

.

 

[noleknight16]

Go ahead and ask your lawyer again with the specific wording given by Touro. I think you should be able to say no, but apparently schools are allowed to revoke acceptances for perfectly legal answers to their questions. Be aware that you will have to disclose this to your state medical license board regardless of what you say now. [See California Penal Code 1203.4 a(1)] I personally think you will be discriminated against by adcoms for having a crime related to fire (such as arson) because it is potentially considered a crime of moral turpitude (as gyngyn talked about).

Were you actually convicted? If you weren't convicted it sounds like you can say no regardless in this situation.

If you were convicted, I would also immediately meet with your lawyer and discuss what your offense's effect on obtaining a medical license will be.

 

[hawruh]

.

 

[noleknight16]

@noleknight16 I was not convicted

You should be good to say no. Call the school and confirm, but the wording of the question appears to be only looking for convictions.

 

[gyngyn]

@gyngyn If the school doesn't ask about it in the secondary, and I get accepted, should I disclose it to them immediately so as not to get my acceptance rescinded?

If they do not ask, you are not compelled to tell them.