Background Checks and Expunged Charge

[sylvia28]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Florida

I had a misdemeanor charge expunged several years ago in Florida. I have since had a pre-employment background check done by a large corporation, and of course no record was found because the private sector has no access to expunged charges.

I am now seeking employment in the field of education, and as with any government job, I have to disclose this expunged charge because the state will investigate the expunged record before hiring. My question is about what exactly I have to answer on the background screening section of a state/school job application. The first section is usually "sealed/expunged records" and I know that I have to answer that section about my expunged charge. The next section is for criminal records in general. Do I have to disclose the expunged charge again in the second "general" section where it asks "have you ever been arrested, entered a plea, blah, blah, blah" after I already disclosed it in the expunged section, or can I skip this section and say "no, I have never been charged" even when it's not exactly true since I was charged, but it's now expunged?

My concern is that by answering criminal history questions with redundant information, I am being weeded out against candidates with no criminal history. If I have to answer "yes" to both sections about charges (expunged and charges in general), that adds up to a lot of check-marks on the criminal history questionnaire which looks really bad for a future teacher.

If I have a right to answer the expunged section only, and then "no" answers to the charges in general I think my application will look significantly better.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Florida

I had a misdemeanor charge expunged several years ago in Florida. I have since had a pre-employment background check done by a large corporation, and of course no record was found because the private sector has no access to expunged charges.

I am now seeking employment in the field of education, and as with any government job, I have to disclose this expunged charge because the state will investigate the expunged record before hiring. My question is about what exactly I have to answer on the background screening section of a state/school job application. The first section is usually "sealed/expunged records" and I know that I have to answer that section about my expunged charge. The next section is for criminal records in general. Do I have to disclose the expunged charge again in the second "general" section where it asks "have you ever been arrested, entered a plea, blah, blah, blah" after I already disclosed it in the expunged section, or can I skip this section and say "no, I have never been charged" even when it's not exactly true since I was charged, but it's now expunged?

My concern is that by answering criminal history questions with redundant information, I am being weeded out against candidates with no criminal history. If I have to answer "yes" to both sections about charges (expunged and charges in general), that adds up to a lot of check-marks on the criminal history questionnaire which looks really bad for a future teacher.

If I have a right to answer the expunged section only, and then "no" answers to the charges in general I think my application will look significantly better.

You have to answer ALL questions honestly.

You are right that a criminal record, whether the arrest and charge and conviction have been expunged or not, CAN look bad for a future teacher. Worse for a future teacher would be lying about anything on the application, though.

I guess that is just one more reason why it is important not to commit crimes.

 

[Silverplum]

Your background will be thoroughly checked: http://www.fldoe.org/teaching/professional-practices/background-screening-requirements.stml

As the wise Quincy stated, answer all questions honestly.

 

[sylvia28]

You have to answer ALL questions honestly.

You are right that a criminal record, whether the arrest and charge and conviction have been expunged or not, CAN look bad for a future teacher. Worse for a future teacher would be lying about anything on the application, though.

I guess that is just one more reason why it is important not to commit crimes.

Thank you, Mr. Quincy, for a very snarky and unsympathetic reply that is evidence enough that you did not make the cut in your fantasy career as an attorney. I maintain my innocence. I exercised my right to expunge a bogus charge so my future students and judgmental internet trolls such as yourself will never know about it The only lapse in judgment I had about the situation was naively electing a "pre-trial diversion" option instead of pleading innocent and praying for the charge to be dropped.

 

[Silverplum]

Thank you, Mr. Quincy, for a very snarky and unsympathetic reply that is evidence enough that you did not make the cut in your fantasy career as an attorney. I maintain my innocence. I exercised my right to expunge a bogus charge so my future students and judgmental internet trolls such as yourself will never know about it The only lapse in judgment I had about the situation was naively electing a "pre-trial diversion" option instead of pleading innocent and praying for the charge to be dropped.

Have fun with all of that.

 

[Zigner]

Thank you, Mr. Quincy, for a very snarky and unsympathetic reply that is evidence enough that you did not make the cut in your fantasy career as an attorney. I maintain my innocence. I exercised my right to expunge a bogus charge so my future students and judgmental internet trolls such as yourself will never know about it The only lapse in judgment I had about the situation was naively electing a "pre-trial diversion" option instead of pleading innocent and praying for the charge to be dropped.

Please don't teach, you are not cut out for it. I say that because Quincy's reply was anything but snarky.

 

[sylvia28]

Please don't teach, you are not cut out for it. I say that because Quincy's reply was anything but snarky.

Wow. Really, people? I think I've learned my lesson about "free advice." Thanks for your two cents, er, actually worthless advice.

 

[Zigner]

Wow. Really, people? I think I've learned my lesson about "free advice." Thanks for your two cents, er, actually worthless advice.

Always glad to be of service...

 

[Silverplum]

As usual, a perfectly abusive poster: ignoring my link/s and/or Q's wise advice, being a twit.

 

[quincy]

Thank you, Mr. Quincy, for a very snarky and unsympathetic reply that is evidence enough that you did not make the cut in your fantasy career as an attorney. I maintain my innocence. I exercised my right to expunge a bogus charge so my future students and judgmental internet trolls such as yourself will never know about it The only lapse in judgment I had about the situation was naively electing a "pre-trial diversion" option instead of pleading innocent and praying for the charge to be dropped.

You can "maintain your innocence" all you want. That is not going to change the fact that you need to answer ALL of the questions honestly on your teacher application - and the honest answer is that you had an arrest/charge/conviction expunged.

That is neither an unsympathetic nor a sympathetic answer to your question. That is an honest answer.

Please read the information in the link Silverplum provided for you.






Why do I get the feeling that sylvia28 is really from California?

 

[sylvia28]

Always glad to be of service...

I hope you and others on here find some paying clients you can tell that to. Honestly, I do. I was going to write it in a mean, sarcastic way, but I'm actually upset about something else and a little over-sensitive at the moment.

I was just shocked and disappointed that people assume I want to be dishonest on a background check. Worse, assume that I'm a guilty criminal. I was referring to the redundancy on an application.

All the best. Thanks for responding.

 

[Silverplum]

I hope you and others on here find some paying clients you can tell that to. Honestly, I do. I was going to write it in a mean, sarcastic way, but I'm actually upset about something else and a little over-sensitive at the moment.

I was just shocked and disappointed that people assume I want to be dishonest on a background check. Worse, assume that I'm a guilty criminal. I was referring to the redundancy on an application.

All the best. Thanks for responding.

It's not a redundancy.

 

[sylvia28]

It's not a redundancy.

It is redundant if I fill out the same answers twice. It is the same information in two different sections.

 

[quincy]

I hope you and others on here find some paying clients you can tell that to. Honestly, I do. I was going to write it in a mean, sarcastic way, but I'm actually upset about something else and a little over-sensitive at the moment.

I was just shocked and disappointed that people assume I want to be dishonest on a background check. Worse, assume that I'm a guilty criminal. I was referring to the redundancy on an application.

All the best. Thanks for responding.

You DID write that in a mean way. Being upset about something else does not excuse bad behavior or rudeness.

Thank you for finally saying "thank you." You're welcome.

 

[Zigner]

It is redundant if I fill out the same answers twice. It is the same information in two different sections.

Then tell the truth in section one and write "see section one" in section two.