 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Yackley6/14/1989
ulations." Id. at 469, 3 OBR at 550, 445 N.E. 2d at 1173. The court cited prior case law which construed the term "offense" to include both felonies and misdemeanors, including State v. Walsh (C.P. 1975), 73 O.O. 2d 498; In re Brady (1927), 116 Ohio St. 512, 5 Ohio Law Abs. 315, 157 N.E. 69.
Although it recognized the possibility of unfair restrictions upon expungement applications, the Herron court stated that it was constrained to apply R.C. 2953.31 as written. The court held that in order to be a first offender and entitled to expungement, the applicant must have no other criminal convictions, including traffic violations. Id. at 469, 3 OBR at 550-551, 445 N.E. 2d at 1172-1173. See, also, State v. Thomas (1979), 64 Ohio App.2d 141, 18 O.O. 3d 106, 411 N.E. 2d 845 (conviction for malicious destruction of property could not be expunged because of three prior misdemeanors); State v. Petrou (1984), 13 Ohio App.3d 456, 13 OBR 546, 469 N.E. 2d 97s(conviction for permitting drug abuse could not be expunged because of subsequent minor misdemeanor conviction of disorderly conduct by intoxication); State v. Weber (1984), 19 Ohio App.3d 214, 19 OBR 359, 484 N.E. 2d 207 (defendant who was convicted of misdemeanor theft and was subsequently convicted of disorderly conduct before seeking expungement of theft conviction was not a first offender qualified for expungement of criminal record).
In sum, the appellant's arguments are defeated by the case law and the statutory language. Prior to the 1984 amendment, expungement of an offense could not be obtained by one who had been convicted of any other offense. A conviction under R.C. 4511.19 for drunk driving falls within the definition of "an offense in this state" as that term was used in former R.C. 2953.31.
The 1984 amendment specifically includes violations of R.C. 4511.19 in the category of offenses which act as a bar to expungement, and specifically excludes minor traffic convictions (those found in R.C. Chapter 4511 4513 or 4549) from this category. 140 Ohio Laws, Part I, 2383. The General Assembly's purpose in amending the statute may have been to correct the result of the former statute, whereby relatively minor convictions (such as speeding) operated as a bar to expungement.
However, irrespective of the reason for the amendment, it is clear that under R.C. 2953.31 and 2953.32(C), prior to the 1984 amendment, a conviction for violating R.C. 4511.19 barred expungement of the record of a conviction for another criminal offense. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT and RESNICK, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|