Page 1 of 2
Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:24 pm
by hbpaint
ok
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:43 pm
by RX8er
The application is pretty clear in what they ask for:
Have you ever been arrested or charged with a crime? (Regardless if pending, dismissed, committed as a juvenile, was long ago OR was in another state.)
This itself would not have disqualified you. You need to get the info from the courts, certified and hope they continue...I have heard of folks that were disqualified though because of omission/lying on their applications.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:44 pm
by Mx217
It depends on what the letter is stating. What does it say? Your arrests wouldn't disqualify you, but they have the right to deny you your license since you did not disclose them on the application. They are probably just asking you to get documents verifying the outcomes of the arrests though.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:50 pm
by hbpaint
Yes
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 4:08 pm
by hbpaint
Well thanks for the info
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2013 4:26 pm
by RX8er
I think now, your application will go to an Investigator II in the Eligibility Evaluation Unit for review and consideration. I have an acquaintance that was denied and lost an appeal and even threatened with prosecution during his appeal because he failed to disclose an arrest 18 years ago that happened in Plano. I don't know all the particulars in this and I am not saying this is what will happen in yours.....
In the future, don't 'think' too much when it comes to answering honestly; just do as it says and follow all instruction.
Good luck!
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:25 am
by apostate
Correct. The eligibility requirements state that failure "to disclose any material fact" renders someone ineligible. The question then becomes whether this intentional omission meets their standard for materiality.
Sec. 411.172. ELIGIBILITY. (a) A person is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun if the person: [...]
(14) has not made any material misrepresentation, or failed to disclose any material fact, in an application submitted pursuant to Section 411.174.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:49 am
by 03Lightningrocks
hbpaint wrote:Yes, they want the court paper work , got it all this morning , certified and sent out today.
I had a couple county issues I had not thought about when getting my first CHL. They sent me the exact same letter you received. Once you get the documents from court house to them, you will be good to go. I was...
By the way... I don't know that I would volunteer the information that I intentionally left it off. No matter the reason. It plainly asks for everything and it does not qualify by saying "that you think is important". I forgot about it works best.
Since they are only requesting more info, I wouldn't offer up any explanation for my non disclosure unless they ask... And I doubt they will.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:16 pm
by hbpaint
Thanks 03Lightningrocks , will do
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:26 pm
by bizarrenormality
RX8er wrote:I think now, your application will go to an Investigator II in the Eligibility Evaluation Unit for review and consideration. I have an acquaintance that was denied and lost an appeal and even threatened with prosecution during his appeal because he failed to disclose an arrest 18 years ago that happened in Plano.
That makes sense. The instructions are clear and if an applicant lies about something and DPS finds out, it's reasonable for DPS to wonder what else the applicant might be lying about.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 8:32 pm
by RX8er
Me personally, I can understand forgetting something that happened 15-20 years ago. I've done that plenty of times.
But, I cannot not agree with intentionally leaving it off the app and signing my name to it.
And, I'll shut up now.
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 9:02 pm
by jmra
RX8er wrote:Me personally, I can understand forgetting something that happened 15-20 years ago. I've done that plenty of times.
But, I cannot not agree with intentionally leaving it off the app and signing my name to it.
And, I'll shut up now.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7824f/7824f0ea3df4a97d9b04cc91a6c32f49be551c28" alt="I Agree :iagree:"
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2013 10:49 pm
by 03Lightningrocks
jmra wrote:RX8er wrote:Me personally, I can understand forgetting something that happened 15-20 years ago. I've done that plenty of times.
But, I cannot not agree with intentionally leaving it off the app and signing my name to it.
And, I'll shut up now.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7824f/7824f0ea3df4a97d9b04cc91a6c32f49be551c28" alt="I Agree :iagree:"
Yep... In my case, I had forgotten about the issues. It was two bad check charges, believe it or not. Who the heck would remember having a check bounce and paying a fine for it after thirty years?? I can't remember what I ate for dinner yesterday.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/da38c/da38c4424aae2a8f75c082dcbac9a84cf1343ba2" alt="Mr. Green :mrgreen:"
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:55 pm
by mecoseko
I have a non disclosure for a burglary of habitation i had back in 2000, this was a 2 nd degree felony. I included it in my app and emailed all my court docs showing that i was gramted the non disclosure and i just recvd my card in the mail today. I would reccomend being up front about it even though you have the non disclosure. I submitted all docs on jan 25 and went through the process in about 45 days
Re: Qualifying
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:58 pm
by 03Lightningrocks
mecoseko wrote:I have a non disclosure for a burglary of habitation i had back in 2000, this was a 2 nd degree felony. I included it in my app and emailed all my court docs showing that i was gramted the non disclosure and i just recvd my card in the mail today. I would reccomend being up front about it even though you have the non disclosure. I submitted all docs on jan 25 and went through the process in about 45 days
I agree that being honest up front is the best strategy. It would be real bad to get denied because of nondisclosure. Especially in cases where the incident itself would have been no problem.