Records Removal Services - New Colorado Expungement Law

The Colorado Legislature has updated expungement laws in the State.

By H. Michael Steinberg on August 13, 2011 7:30 PM

A new Colorado Law will assist people who have been convicted of certain drug crime misdemeanor and drug felonies with expunging / sealing their records

The bill amends the process for sealing the record of a criminal conviction under Colorado’s Uniform Controlled Substances Act, reduces the waiting period for certain classes of convictions, and authorizes the process of records sealing for additional classes of convictions. With limited exceptions, the bill applies only to convictions on or after July 1, 2011.

The New Law: Colorado House Bill 11-1167
Sealing criminal records – drug offenses – time periods – district attorney approval – no reporting of sealed convictions – advisement of rights – applicability July 1, 2011.

This new law – which takes effect on July 1. 2011 amends the petition process for sealing certain drug offense criminal conviction records.

It Amends the time period the defendant has to wait to petition the court to seal the record which depends on the severity of the offense.

In order to have the record sealed, the defendant must show the court that he or she has not been convicted of another offense or been charged with another offense since the discharge of the offense for which the defendant is seeking to have sealed.

District Attorney Can Object and Veto the Process
The district attorney has the right to object to the petition or veto the request for all offenses except petty offenses. Also depending on the severity of the offense, the court can:

(1) immediately order the record sealed,

or (2) can consider the petition based on established criteria,

or (3) can hold a hearing to decide the petition.

The court, in making the decision whether to seal conviction records, considers the privacy interests of the defendant against the public interest in retaining the conviction records as open records.

Conviction records cannot be sealed if the defendant still owes court-ordered restitution, fines, or fees.

A defendant who successfully petitions a court for the sealing of conviction records must provide the Colorado bureau of investigation (bureau) and each custodian of the conviction records with a copy of the court’s order to seal the conviction records and pay to the bureau any costs related to the sealing of the conviction records in the custody of the bureau.

Employers and certain institutions and agencies are prohibited from requiring an applicant to disclose information in sealed conviction records. Law enforcement will report that there are no public records in response to inquiries about sealed criminal conviction records. The office of the state court administrator must post on its web site a list of all petitions to seal conviction records that are filed with a district court.

The new law also prohibits district court from granting a petition to seal conviction records until at least 30 days following the posting.

Here are THE SPECIFICS OF THE NEW LAW:
24-72-308.6. sealing of criminal conviction records information

For offenses involving controlled substances for convictions entered on or after July 1, 2011.

(1) Definitions. For purposes of this section, “conviction records” means arrest and criminal records information and any records pertaining to a judgment of conviction.

(2) Sealing of conviction records.

(A) (i) subject to the Limitations described in subsection (4) of this section, a defendant
may petition the district court of the district in which any conviction records pertaining to the defendant are located for the sealing of the conviction records, except basic identifying
information, if the petition is filed within the time frame described in subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph (a).

Drug Crimes – Petty Offenses or Class 2 or 3 Misdemeanors (three years)
(II) (A) If the offense is a petty offense or a class 2 or 3 Misdemeanor in article 18 of title 18, CRS the petition may be filed three years after the later of the date of the final disposition of all criminal proceedings against the defendant or the release of the defendant from supervision concerning a criminal conviction.

Drug Crimes – Class 1 Misdemeanors (five years)
(B) If the offense is a class 1 misdemeanor in article 18 of Title 18, CRS, the petition may be filed five years after the later of the date of the final disposition of all criminal proceedings against the defendant or the release of the defendant from supervision concerning a criminal conviction.

Drug Crimes – Class 5 and Class 6 Felonies (seven years)
(C) if the offense is a class 5 felony or class 6 felony drug possession offense described in section 18-18-403.5 or 18-18-404, CRS., or section 18-18-405, CRS., as it existed prior to August 11, 2010, the petition may be filed seven years after the later of the date of the final disposition of all criminal proceedings against.

Posted by Records Removal Services. Credit to the H. Michael Steinberg, Attorney

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

Records Removal Services - New Indiana Expungement Law

By: Records Removal Services

Until July 2011 people convicted of criminal offenses only had the option of a Pardon by the State of Indiana. Now, the Indiana Legislature passed legislation which Governor Mitch Daniels into law and effective July 01, 2011 allows non-violent offenders to have their criminal records sealed for misdemeanor and Class D felonies.

The new expungement law applies to people who people who after eight (8) years following the completion of their sentence to have their criminal records sealed.

If granted, an individual would not be required to disclose the conviction on employment applications or any other documents outside of the criminal justice system. Furthermore, it gives ex-offenders the ability to legally state on an application for employment that they have not been convicted or arrested for a crime, removing a large barrier in finding employment.

"Every legislative session, new laws pass that directly impact the lives of Hoosiers," said Jamal L. Smith, Executive Director of the Indiana Civil Rights Commission. "It's important that we share this information with people so that everyone has a clear understanding of their rights."

Even after a seal however, Records Removal Services must still update privately owned criminal databases.

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

New Rhode Island and Providence Plantations expungement laws effective

Before leaving office, two-term Governor Donald Carcieri (R) (pictured) of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations signed new expungement legislation into law on June 25, 2010.

The new law allows the Expungement of Deferred Sentences five (5) years after sentencing. In Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, a motion to expunge is required to expunge a Criminal Conviction.

This law will allow anyone with a Deferred Sentence in Rhode Island and Providence Plantations to expunge their criminal record after 5 years, so long as they remain criminal activity free (not arrest for a criminal offense) during the five (5) year period.

Previously, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Courts were regularly allowing the expungement of Deferred Sentences. However, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations ruled that a person had to wait 10 years after completion of the Deferred Sentence in order to be eligible for expungement. The new law signed by Governor Donald Carcieri (R) (pictured) essentially nullifies and overturns the Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Supreme Court ruling.

Every State or Commonwealth has their criminal code and definition of expungement, seal, pardon, or expungement after pardon. In the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantation, expungement is defined as: "Expungement of records and records of conviction" means the sealing and retention of all records of a conviction and/or probation and the removal from active files of all records and information relating to conviction and/or probation. G.S. § 12-1.3-1.

Like most States, the conviction of a felony may be grounds for revoking or refusing to issue a professional license. Examples include: Private Investigator (R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-5-3(2), Private Security Guard Business (§ 5-5.1-8(a)(3), Pharmacist (§ 5-19-18), and Veterinarian (§ 5-25-14(1) amoung others.

Rhode Island has a registration requirement for sex offenders. R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-37-16.

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations was the first of the thirteen original colonies to declare independence from British rule and the last to ratify the United States Constitution.

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signs new legislation broadening the state's expungement statute

The Honorable Chris Christie, Governor of the State of New Jersey recently signed new legislation broadening the state's expungement statute. Governor Christie signed the legislation into law after it passed both houses of the New Jersey Legislature; the General Assembly and the Senate earlier this year.

CHANGES TO NEW JERSEY EXPUNGEMENT LAWS:

• Citizens with convictions for third or fourth degree drug distribution convictions on their record may be expunged.

• The new legislation also reduces waiting periods for the expungement of indictable (felony) convictions. Under the old law, a citizen had to wait until 10 years had passed. Under the new expungement statute, certain indictable convictions will be eligible for consideration after a period of 5 years. There will be a series of factors that the court will consider when deciding if an early expungement should be granted. The important thing is the application can be filed, in most cases, 5 years earlier than before.

The changes to New Jersey's expungement laws include other provisions, but the ones listed above are the most beneficial for people who need an expungement. For additional information, contact Records Removal Services today! Don't let your criminal history haunt you for the rest of your life!

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

Alabama expungement law proposed (currently Alabama has no expungement law)

A bill that would allow expungement of criminal records under certain circumstances and if specific criteria are met is one step closer to becoming law.

The bill, HB 59 sponsored by Rep. Chris England of Tuscaloosa, "would authorize a person charged or convicted of certain felony or misdemeanor criminal offenses, a violation, or a traffic violation to petition the court in which the charges where filed or in which the conviction occurred to have his or her records expunged, including, but not limited to, arrest records, fingerprints, photographs, or index references in documentary or electronic form, relating to the arrest or charge, or both, and conviction in certain instances."

Depending on the type of conviction an individual received determines the criteria that must be met in order to have a record expunged. If an individual has been convicted of a violent crime (capital murder, murder, rape in the first degree, manslaughter, attempted murder, sodomy in the first degree, and etc.), he / she does not qualify for expungement under this bill.

HB 59 now goes to the Senate for consideration; however, if the filibuster continues, most likely, no further movement on this bill will take place this legislative session.

Note:  The State of Alabama did perform criminal record seals/expungements.  However, the Alabama Supreme Court ordered the sealed/expunged records re-opened citing the Judges who orders the criminal record seals and expungements lack legislative authority.  

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

Minnesota Supreme Court upholds limits set on sealing criminal records

The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that district courts do not have the authority to seal criminal records beyond the courts themselves — a decision that may be bad for defendants but good for public-records advocates.

The case began in 1992, when a defendant identified as S.L.H. pleaded guilty to fifth-degree felony possession of cocaine in Robbinsdale. She was 20. After three years, the charge was dropped to a misdemeanor.

In 2000, a petition for expungement, or sealing, of her record, was filed, but the district court denied the request.

She tried again in 2006. S.L.H. argued that she was a single parent of four children and wanted to be better equipped to support her family. She explained she hoped to become a Head Start Teacher or a medical assistant — but neither job would be open to her without expungement of her criminal records.

Hennepin County District Court agreed. The court found in July 2006 that the benefit of expungement to S.L.H. outweighed the disadvantage to the public from eliminating her record and ordered all judicial records of the offense be sealed.

But the lower court also said it did not have the authority to order nonjudicial records sealed. That means that records at the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension still would be open to anyone who wished to see them.

The Court of Appeals agreed with the district court, and Thursday's Supreme Court decision basically affirms that.

But the decision seems toleave room for interpretation, said Mark Haase, staff attorney for the Council on Crime and Justice, which filed a brief on behalf of S.L.H.

It says granting her access to employment is not "essential to the existence, dignity and function of a court" and that granting expungement of records outside the judicial branch is therefore not within its authority.

But the court seemed to suggest there might be cases that are, citing one in which charges were dismissed.

"The jury, so to speak, is not completely out on it," Haase said. "We don't want to discourage people from trying to get expungements, because the opinion is not clear. I want people who may have a shot at getting a remedy to pursue that."

He said it's vitally important for people to have a chance at a clean slate.

"The vast majority of people who are trying to get expungements are not serious offenders," Haase said. "They're trying to move on with their life; they can't get a job. Do we really want people to carry that with them and (have it) be a hindrance to getting employment and housing for that long?"

The Supreme Court points out, however, that the Legislature has determined, as outlined in the Minnesota Data Practices Act, that certain law enforcement data are public.

"The expungement of S.L.H.'s criminal records held outside the judicial branch would effectively override the legislative determination that some of these records be kept open to the public," the court wrote.

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

Rhode Island House of Representatives OKs bill to destroy criminal records

Despite objections from the Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Attorney General, the State Police and the Governor, the Rhode Island and Providence Plantations House of Representatives voted 46 to 17 for a bill to quash and destroy the records of criminal cases in which the accused was given a deferred sentence, usually in exchange for sparing the state a trial by pleading no contest or guilty to a crime.

The bill sailed through the House with no debate yesterday after a heated — but short-circuited debate earlier this week — in which proponents assured their colleagues it was aimed at helping people remove from their records youthful indiscretions that were keeping them from moving ahead in life, school and jobs, and opponents noted the bill goes much further than the state’s existing expungement law in that it is not limited to nonviolent crimes by first-time offenders.

Beyond that, critics argued that it could be used as a legal club to try to prevent newspapers from publishing facts that the public already knows about crimes — or perhaps should know — if they involve candidates for a job, including public office. Current state law bars people with certain felony convictions from obtaining state licenses to work in nursing, social work and auto repair: this would provide a way around that.

“So now we are rewriting history and telling the newspaper they can’t refer to something that everybody knows about?” Rep. Laurence Ehrhardt, R-North Kingstown, asked rhetorically.

Current law already allows the expungement of a single nonviolent offense from the record of a first-time offender five years after he or she has completed a sentence for a misdemeanor, or 10 years after completing a sentence for a felony.

Despite efforts over the years by the minority community, the criminal defense bar and the gun lobby to shorten the waiting periods, this law remains intact and was used to remove 4,360 misdemeanors and 625 felonies from the public record last year alone, and 28,417 criminal cases from the public record since 2000.

Yesterday’s bill was sparked by a November decision by the Rhode Island Supreme Court on the treatment of cases in which the admitted criminal had been given a deferred prison sentence, as was the case in a number of high-profile cases involving accused stalkers, embezzlers, an admitted accomplice to a gunpoint robbery in Waterplace Park who traded testimony for a reduced sentence, one of the admitted co-conspirators in the Lincoln bribery scandal and at least one child molester.

The court's decision centered on two admitted criminals foiled by a judge in their efforts to get their records expunged. One had pleaded no contest to second-degree robbery; the other to a drug-possession charge. Both received deferred sentences. They both appealed to the high court after a judge ruled them ineligible for expungement: the first because he had committed a violent crime, and the second because she got into further trouble.

"Because they never were actually sentenced," their lawyer argued that "they had not been convicted of any offense and therefore all records involving their arrest and plea should be erased." But the Supreme Court disagreed. Since "a plea of nolo contendere is an implied confession of guilt," the court said "it follows that such a plea constitutes a conviction for purposes of weighing who is and is not eligible for expungement, even when it has been followed by a deferred sentence."

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

New Texas Non-Disclosure Limitation

The Texas Legislature recently enacted another eligibility requirement for non-disclosures.

After September 1, 2007, a person petitioning for non-disclosure cannot have been convicted or put on deferred adjudication for another offense while on deferred for the offense they wish to seal.

For example, you successfully complete deferred adjudication for theft. However, while on the theft deferred, you picked up a deferred adjudication for assault. You will now not be able to petition to seal the theft deferred.

If you are on deferred adjudication probation and pick up another offense, it is now more important than ever to fight the new charge.

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.

Colorado legislators have approved a bill that would permit convicted criminals to seal certain criminal court records

Colorado legislators have approved a bill that would permit convicted criminals to seal certain criminal court records, a move open government advocates say would impede the public's right to know.

The bill is now on the desk of Gov. Bill Ritter, who has until June 4 to sign the legislation. The proposed law would allow people convicted of crimes to petition the courts 10 years after their cases have ended to have their criminal records sealed. The bill applies to people who have had no convictions in a decade and excludes certain criminal convictions, including traffic offenses, DUI, child abuse and sex offenses.

If their requests are granted, those people then would not have to indicate on a job application, except to a criminal justice agency, that they were convicted.

In a nod to the concerns raised by the Colorado Press Association, the bill was amended to require court administrators to post notices of requests to seal criminal records on court Web sites for 30 days. The public may also ask to have cases unsealed based on new information or circumstances that could tip the balance in favor of public disclosure.

Greg Romberg, a lobbyist for the press association, said the media is still opposed to the bill. "Public records should remain open to the public," he said.

Romberg said, however, that the changes at least mitigate some of the negative effects of the bill by allowing the public's concerns about sealing records to "come to light" in a court hearing, which the original version of the bill did not allow.

He also said the change about allowing previously sealed cases to be reopened could apply in cases where people have made themselves into public figures by, for instance, running for public office.

"That would be a situation where it would be hard for a judge not to take a look at that," he said.

Currently, Colorado law allows records to be sealed when a person was not charged or when charges were dismissed because of a plea agreement in another case. The bill now under consideration would also reduce the amount of time those people must wait to ask to have their records sealed, from 15 years to 10 years after all criminal proceedings end.

The state House approved the legislation by a 46-18 vote in April, while state senators passed the bill earlier this month in a 26-8 vote. The proposed law was introduced in January.

> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.