TexasCHLforum.com

Hello, I have been reading many eligibility posts on the forum and none relate to my specific condition so maybe someone can help. I have a lenghty criminal history from my rebellious teenager days. Here is my list. 11/16/2005-arrest for theft (more than $50 less than $500) completed probation successfully. 8/2/2005 arrested for theft (less than $50) no court date or judgment, paid fine & was released & minor in possession of alcohol, paid fine and released. 4/11/2006 arrested for dwi, case was dismissed. 9/9/2006 sexual assault of a child (I was 19 and had a gf that was 16) case was dismissed and was convicted of a lesser charge of enticing a child (class b) on 9/10/2007. 5/28/2010 dwi arrest, ended in district attorney signing non prosecution affidavit. To the best of my knowledge I am eligible because the last thing I was actually convicted of was the deferred for the class b on 9/10/2007 and it is now over 5 years since that date. I already have certified copies of ALL judgments and charging instruments for every case, but I was wondering if even though both of my dwi's were dismissed will this large list of criminal history
affect my application. Just fyi I am not the person that I use
to be so only serious answers please.

I see it is your first post, so welcome.

When was the deferred window for the class B completed?

The concern I would have is the number of achohol related arrests. Even though not all are convictions, the DPS may see it as an addiction and deny it on that basis.

IANAL and this is just my .02 but would be worth checking with the DPS on this.

I agree. Two relevant convictions are automatic presumption of chemical dependency, but DPS has pretty broad discretion for looking at patterns of behavior and denying an application for chemical dependency.

I appreciate the answers, I had been wondering about the chemically dependant definition. I have already gone through the process and sent in packet, was just trying to get an idea of what to expect. Both dwi's were dismissed because I was clearly not intoxicated, I had to go through a bunch of trouble getting my pilot certificate for the same reason but was able to convince them that the arrests were not justified. Guess I'll have to jump through the same hoops for DPS as I did for FAA!

fickman wrote:When was the deferred window for the class B completed?

It was completed 9/9/2009, but my understanding of the 5 year wait is 5 years from the date of conviction not time of completion of probation, is that correct?

recaffeination wrote:I agree. Two relevant convictions are automatic presumption of chemical dependency, but DPS has pretty broad discretion for looking at patterns of behavior and denying an application for chemical dependency.

If they do decide to deny for reasons of suspicion of chemical dependancy is there a way to appeal their decision?

You have not been convicted of DWI, so no chemical dependancy problems there. Only convictions count.

And MIP does not count, as it is a Class C Misdemeanor.

You need to make sure you have copies of all your court disposition documents, as DPS will want those.

Crossfire wrote:You have not been convicted of DWI, so no chemical dependancy problems there. Only convictions count.

Correct, no conviction, I was just worried like the others said that it may arise suspicion of chemical dependancy.

Crossfire wrote:You need to make sure you have copies of all your court disposition documents, as DPS will want those.

I sent certified court judgments and charging instruments with my packet so hopefully they will have all they need.

Crossfire wrote:You have not been convicted of DWI, so no chemical dependancy problems there. Only convictions count.

Only convictions count toward automatic disqualification.

GC §411.172. ELIGIBILITY. (c) An individual who has been convicted two times within the10-year period preceding the date on which the person applies for a license of an offense of the grade of Class B misdemeanor or greater that involves the use of alcohol or a controlled substance as a statutory element of the offense is a chemically dependent person for purposes of this section and is not qualified to receive a license under this subchapter. This subsection does not preclude the disqualification of an individual for being a chemically dependent person if other evidence exists to show that the person is a chemically dependent person.

bizarrenormality wrote: This subsection does not preclude the disqualification of an individual for being a chemically dependent person if other evidence exists to show that the person is a chemically dependent person.

So basically what that is saying is the only way it would be an instant disqualification is if they were both convictions, but just the existence of the arrests could fall under the "other evidence existing" category? I hate reading legal format stuff!