In or about September 2021, I was involved in a single incident that later resulted in a conviction for assault and battery. The incident did not involve a weapon, did not result in serious bodily injury, and has not been followed by any subsequent incidents of criminal or violent conduct.
My case proceeded through the Richmond City Behavioral Health Docket, a specialty docket designed to address underlying behavioral health concerns and promote rehabilitation rather than punitive outcomes alone. Due to the nature of that docket, court congestion, and compliance with treatment-oriented conditions, the case remained pending for an extended period.
As a result, although the underlying conduct occurred in September 2021, my final conviction was not entered until 2023.
Since the September 2021 incident, I have:
- Remained arrest-free and incident-free;
- Fully complied with all court-ordered requirements;
Engaged in treatment and recovery-oriented services;
Received certification as a Peer Recovery Specialist; and
- Sought lawful employment within the behavioral health field.
Measured from the date of the incident, the relevant date for assessing public-safety risk, I have now demonstrated four full years of good behavior.
- Application of the Barrier Crime Statute
DBHDS applies the barrier crime statute by measuring the four-year “good behavior” period from the date of conviction, rather than from the date of the underlying conduct, without any individualized assessment and without accounting for court-caused delay.
As applied to me, this interpretation:
- Extends the employment exclusion beyond four years of actual good behavior;
- Penalizes participation in a behavioral health specialty docket;
- Converts administrative delay into an additional civil sanction;
- Bears no rational relationship to present fitness or public safety.
Two individuals who engaged in identical conduct on the same date may face materially different exclusion periods based solely on how long the court system took to resolve their cases, a result that is arbitrary and constitutionally suspect.
As applied, DBHDS’s enforcement of the statute raises serious concerns under the Fourteenth Amendment, including:
1. Substantive Due Process
The automatic extension of a civil employment exclusion based solely on conviction date, rather than time since the conduct, irrationally burdens my liberty interest in pursuing lawful employment and is not rationally related to public safety.
2. Equal Protection
The conviction date rule creates arbitrary distinctions between similarly situated individuals and penalizes those whose cases were delayed due to court-imposed or rehabilitative processes beyond their control.
These time-based employment exclusions lack individualized assessment and fail to account for rehabilitation, particularly in the context of behavioral health and workforce reintegration.
On December 8, 2025, after a rigorous hiring process, I was hired with Chesterfield County Mental Health as a Certified Peer Recovery Specialist on the Assertive Community Treatment team. Our team lead, department manager and Director all agreed on my fitness for the role. After being employed for 30 days, I was terminated due to the DBHDS barrier crimes statute.
In or about September 2021, I was involved in a single incident that later resulted in a conviction for assault and battery. The incident did not involve a weapon, did not result in serious bodily injury, and has not been followed by any subsequent incidents of criminal or violent conduct. My case proceeded through the Richmond City Behavioral Health Docket, a specialty docket designed to address underlying behavioral health concerns and promote rehabilitation rather than punitive outcomes alone. Due to the nature of that docket, court congestion, and compliance with treatment-oriented conditions, the case remained pending for an extended period. As a result, although the underlying conduct occurred in September 2021, my final conviction was not entered until 2023. Since the September 2021 incident, I have: - Remained arrest-free and incident-free; - Fully complied with all court-ordered requirements; Engaged in treatment and recovery-oriented services; Received certification as a Peer Recovery Specialist; and - Sought lawful employment within the behavioral health field. Measured from the date of the incident, the relevant date for assessing public-safety risk, I have now demonstrated four full years of good behavior. - Application of the Barrier Crime Statute DBHDS applies the barrier crime statute by measuring the four-year “good behavior” period from the date of conviction, rather than from the date of the underlying conduct, without any individualized assessment and without accounting for court-caused delay. As applied to me, this interpretation: - Extends the employment exclusion beyond four years of actual good behavior; - Penalizes participation in a behavioral health specialty docket; - Converts administrative delay into an additional civil sanction; - Bears no rational relationship to present fitness or public safety. Two individuals who engaged in identical conduct on the same date may face materially different exclusion periods based solely on how long the court system took to resolve their cases, a result that is arbitrary and constitutionally suspect. As applied, DBHDS’s enforcement of the statute raises serious concerns under the Fourteenth Amendment, including: 1. Substantive Due Process The automatic extension of a civil employment exclusion based solely on conviction date, rather than time since the conduct, irrationally burdens my liberty interest in pursuing lawful employment and is not rationally related to public safety. 2. Equal Protection The conviction date rule creates arbitrary distinctions between similarly situated individuals and penalizes those whose cases were delayed due to court-imposed or rehabilitative processes beyond their control. These time-based employment exclusions lack individualized assessment and fail to account for rehabilitation, particularly in the context of behavioral health and workforce reintegration. On December 8, 2025, after a rigorous hiring process, I was hired with Chesterfield County Mental Health as a Certified Peer Recovery Specialist on the Assertive Community Treatment team. Our team lead, department manager and Director all agreed on my fitness for the role. After being employed for 30 days, I was terminated due to the DBHDS barrier crimes statute.