In order to qualify people quickly, Records Removal Services has added the a Qualification Questionnaire. Generally, people who pass the questionnaire qualify immediately for a criminal record expungement, seal, or pardon.
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Ohio Governor Ted Strickland Announces an Unprecedented Number of Clemency (Pardon) Decisions
The individuals granted pardons today have demonstrated that they have been rehabilitated and have assumed the responsibilities of citizenship.
Former Governor Bob Taft did not act on 63 clemency requests from 2005 and 2006. So Governor Strickland's staff has been overwhelmed with reviewing all requests.
Ohio Governor Ted Strickland and Illinois Governor Pat Quinn have granted an unprecedented number of pardons.
PLEASE NOTE THAT EACH STATE IS SOVEREIGN WITH ITS OWN CONSTITUTION AND LAWS. IN GEORGIA FOR EXAMPLE, THE GOVERNOR HAS ABSOLUTELY NO PARDON AUTHORITY.
Ohio Governor Strickland has already begun his review of the 177 recommendations received from the Parole Board during 2008, after which he will turn to the 226 recommendations already received in 2009.
"I believe the clemency power should be used judiciously to give a second chance to those who have demonstrated they deserve it, and to modify the unusually long sentence that is out of sync with the norm," Strickland said. "I do not intend my clemency decisions to be seen as a determination that mistakes were made by judges, prosecutors, police officers or others in the criminal justice system. These decisions are another part of the overall system of justice that attempts to hold individuals responsible for their behavior while recognizing that ours is a society able to forgive, and welcome back, those who demonstrate they have earned, and can responsibly handle, society's mercy and forgiveness."
Ohio Governor's Constitutional Clemency Authority and Pardon Process:
The Ohio Parole Board and Governor Strickland consider applications for two forms of clemency: commutations and pardons. A commutation is the change of a legal punishment for the commission of a crime to a lesser punishment. A pardon is a complete forgiveness for a crime committed, eliminating all penalties and other legal consequences for the commission of a crime. An individual granted a full and unconditional pardon is deemed, by law, to have never committed the offense.
The Ohio Constitution authorizes Ohio's governor to grant pardons and commutations "for all crimes and offenses, except treason and cases of impeachment" (Article III, Section 11). Under Ohio law, the governor may only grant a pardon or commutation after the adult parole authority has received a clemency application and the parole authority has provided a written recommendation to the governor. The governor may follow or reject the parole authority's recommendation.
The governor's legal staff review of each parole board recommendation includes, but is not limited to: communication with the court and the prosecutor's office involved in the conviction; input and assistance from law enforcement officials, defense counsel, witnesses, victims and others who may have information relevant to the governor's decisions; consultation of official records from the offender's prosecution and appeals, the parole board's report and exhibits, petitions, letters, media reports and other documents or materials concerning the case.
The legal counsel prepares these findings for the governor's review, initially shielding their clemency recommendations at the governor's request. After a thorough and detailed discussion of the specifics of a given case, the legal staff presents their recommendation for or against clemency. The governor considers the totality of information presented for each application and decides whether to approve or deny clemency.
The governor's office estimates that in excess of 1,000 person hours have been spent reviewing the cases announced today.
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Illinois Governor Pat Quinn grants a massive amount of pardons
People who have been convicted of murder, violent crimes, sex crimes are typically automatically disqualified by both Records Removal Services and the Board of Pardons (sometimes called the Board of Pardons and Parole).
Since Governor Quinn was sworn into office on January 29, 2009, he has decided on 769 Petitions, granting a total of 321 Petitions.
Plus, Governor Quinn has his own pile, making the total pending Petitions to be around 2450, according to a spokesman in the Governor's Communications Office.
Governor Quinn is using his exclusive power to the benefit of the most deserving people, granting almost 42% of the Petitions thus far:
"Our society brands the felon with a Scarlet Letter for the rest of his or her lifetime. Essentially, once a felon, always a felon. This is wrong. This is not forgiveness. This is not mercy. Yes, people must understand that consequences come with illegal acts. But every person who was convicted of a crime, was sentenced and served a sentence, whether probation or prison. A lifetime punishment is harmful to society as a whole.
Rehabilitation must be encouraged in our society. The kid who gets caught selling dope at 18-years old should not be labeled a "convicted felon" for the rest of his life if he can prove he is a contributing member of society. If he has gone to school, purchased a home, raised a family, why should he continue to be punished?
A pardon gives the deserving person an opportunity to remove the "convicted felon" tattoo. The pardon allows for the deserving person to apply for a better job so that he or she can support his family. Rehabilitation must be rewarded." - Tamara N. Holder, Illinois Attorney, Legal and Political Commentator
Tamara N. Holder, Illinois defense and civil rights attorney/legal and political commentator contributed to his article from her commentator blog.
Pardon power in the State of Illinois is vested in the Governor, who is assisted by recommendations of the Prisoner Review Board.
NOTE: With each U.S. state being sovereign however, each state has their own constitution and laws. In the State of Georgia for example, the Governor is prohibited from being involved in pardons and pardon power is vested exclusively in the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole.
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Monday, March 29, 2010
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signs new legislation broadening the state's expungement statute
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.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
What do states owe the exonerated?
Connecticut legislators voted to award $5 million to James Tillman to help him get his life back on track after 18 years behind bars for a rape he didn't commit.
The Florida Legislature, on the other hand, denied Alan Crotzer's request for $1.25 million and let a bill die that would have standardized a compensation system for victims of wrongful conviction.
"I felt so disappointed," says Mr. Crotzer, who served more than 24 years in a Florida prison until DNA evidence cleared him of rape and kidnapping charges. He's been working odd jobs that pay less than $300 a week since he got out. "The bottom line is, I don't think I could ever put a price on freedom…. But they've got to put a system in place. [This issue] isn't going away."
Last month, the 200th person was exonerated due to DNA evidence, but the majority of those released have gotten nothing but an apology – and sometimes not even that.
"We are exonerating people who did not commit crimes, spent two decades in prison or time on death row, and when they get out, there are fewer reentry services for these people than for individuals who actually committed crimes," says Barry Scheck, codirector of the Innocence Project at Yeshiva University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, which is dedicated to exonerating the wrongfully convicted. "It's a measure of decency."
As DNA exonerations become more plentiful – and more publicized – some states are moving on the compensation front. Of the 200 men who have been exonerated based on DNA evidence, about 45 percent have received some sort of compensation, according to the Innocence Project, with amounts that range from $25,000 to $12.2 million.
Twenty-one states, along with the federal government and the District of Columbia, now have standardized compensation laws on the books – offering exonerees amounts ranging from $15,000 total to $50,000 per year of imprisonment. Thirteen states have introduced bills this year to either create or improve compensation for the wrongfully convicted. Some of those bills, like the one that gave Mr. Tillman $5 million, dealt only with individual prisoners, but other states are trying to standardize the compensation.
Crotzer – as much as he would have liked to see his own petition for compensation filled – favors the latter, as do most advocates of the wrongfully convicted. "It's like I've got my hand out begging," he says of the process he went through. "It makes me feel bad."
Texas, where 13 men have been exonerated in Dallas County alone, is considering a package of bills that would, among other things, raise the compensation amount from $25,000 to $50,000 per year of incarceration.
Vermont – which hasn't yet had a prisoner exonerated by DNA evidence – has passed a comprehensive bill that would provide between $30,000 and $60,000 per year of incarceration as well as access to healthcare and reintegration services. It's currently awaiting the governor's signature.
That's a trend that advocates at the Innocence Project hope they see more of. They note that in addition to monetary compensation, most of the wrongfully convicted leave prison with few skills and desperately need access to education, mental-health services, medical care, and job training. Currently, most exonerees don't even have access to the same sort of services that parolees get, since they're not being paroled.
"In Florida, if you're a parolee they give you $100 and a bus ticket," says Michael Olenick, the Tallahassee attorney who represented Crotzer pro bono. "Al Crotzer got no bus ticket, and no $100."
He also didn't get access to counseling, and he says he's struggled with some things since his release: He still wants to turn his light off at 11:47 every night, for instance, and he keeps everything in his room neat enough to pass a cell inspection.
Crotzer recently married a woman with two children and has worked a series of low-skill jobs ranging from street cleaning to janitorial duties. He's in the process of moving to Tallahassee, where he has an offer to work as a dishwasher. But he's hoping for a job at a nearby sheriff's office working with at-risk youth, and he's trying to stay sanguine about it all. "I kept my self-respect by not becoming the monster they wanted me to be," he says of his years in prison.
Neither Mr. Olenick nor Crotzer can be sure why the request for $1.25 million failed, especially after the Florida House unanimously approved it. Senate leaders said they didn't have the money – a common reason that states cite in not providing compensation. In Crotzer's case, some also suggested that lawmakers didn't want to grant any more individual compensation bills, but instead wanted to pass a "global" bill that would address all cases. However, the three such bills that were introduced in past years didn't go anywhere.
Some believe Crotzer may also have been hurt by the fact that he was convicted of a beer store robbery when he was 18 – a fact that would have excluded him from compensation under one of the laws proposed in Florida.
Olenick says he'll keep fighting and will refile the claim for next year's session. "When you handle a case like Al's, he becomes locked in your heart," Olenick says. "Until he gets compensated, I'm not going to stop."
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Monday, April 20, 2009
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.
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
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.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
State of Wyoming and the federal government continue court battle
A federal appeals court in Denver has ruled against Wyoming in a lawsuit over a state law that seeks to allow people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to regain their gun rights.
A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled that the procedure spelled out in Wyoming law fails to expunge the criminal record of people convicted of domestic violence.
The ruling is a victory for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The agency had informed Wyoming that if it persisted in using the state law, the federal government would no longer accept Wyoming concealed weapons permits as a substitute for instant background checks for gun purchases.
Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said Wednesday that he's unlikely to suggest that the state ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
"We now have two federal courts that have rejected Wyoming's position," Salzburg said, adding that the Supreme Court reviews only a small number of cases.
Salzburg said his office planned to put out a statement on Wednesday advising people who have gone through the procedure to expunge their misdemeanor records of the court's decision. He said the ruling means that if such people now have guns, they "may be viewed by federal authorities as being in violation of federal firearms law."
The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division in Washington represented the BATF in the lawsuit. Charles Miller, spokesman for the division, said Wednesday the office had no comment on the ruling.
The 2004 Wyoming law at the center of the lawsuit allows people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to petition in state court to expunge their conviction and restore their gun rights. The law requires that petitioners must have completed probation, and it limits people to just one such request.
The Wyoming Attorney General's Office said last year that Wyoming courts expunged 63 misdemeanor convictions from 2005 through last October. Salzburg said Wednesday that only one person with an expunged record had gone on to receive a state-issued concealed weapons permit and said at least two other such applications are pending.
The BATF objected to a provision of the state law that specified that an "expunged" conviction would be kept by the state Division of Criminal Investigation and could be used to enhance penalties for future domestic violence convictions. The BATF said that conviction records weren't truly expunged if they were kept on the books for any purpose.
Federal law requires gun dealers to perform an instant background check of prospective purchasers through a national database unless the buyer has a state-issued concealed weapon permit. The BATF said Wyoming's law could allow people to get a concealed weapons permit even though they wouldn't qualify under federal standards.
Wyoming sued the BATF over its threat to reject all Wyoming-issued concealed carry permits as a substitute for background checks. In May 2007, U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson of Wyoming rejected the state's claims that the federal agency had arbitrarily rejected the state law.
The state's lawsuit has attracted national attention from groups on both sides of the gun-control debate at both the federal district court and appellate court levels.
Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington said Wednesday his group regards Tuesday's appeals court ruling as a victory for public safety. The center had filed papers in court in support of the BATF's position.
"We should not make it easier for dangerous abusers to get firearms," Vice said. "And we've seen that domestic violence abuse cases are extremely dangerous when guns are involved."
The Gun Owners Foundation and the National Rifle Association had filed papers in court supporting the state's position.
Herb Titus, lawyer for the Gun Owners Foundation, said Wednesday his group is disappointed with the appeals court decision.
"We think it's wrong," Titus said. "We think this is a matter of state right -- that Congress intended that the states have the right to define expungement according to state policy and state purposes, and obviously, the 10th Circuit disagrees."
Mike Blonigen, Casper district attorney and president of the Wyoming Prosecutors Association, said Wednesday that his office has been advising people interested in petitioning for restoration of their gun rights that a decision on the case was pending. The state law requires prosecutors to review restoration petitions.
"I think it's one of these situations, where if you're going to call it an expungement, it has to have all the characteristics of an expungement, and frankly this law didn't get there," Blonigen said. "You can't say you're going to take it away for these purposes, but not for these three purposes over there."
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled that the procedure spelled out in Wyoming law fails to expunge the criminal record of people convicted of domestic violence.
The ruling is a victory for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The agency had informed Wyoming that if it persisted in using the state law, the federal government would no longer accept Wyoming concealed weapons permits as a substitute for instant background checks for gun purchases.
Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said Wednesday that he's unlikely to suggest that the state ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
"We now have two federal courts that have rejected Wyoming's position," Salzburg said, adding that the Supreme Court reviews only a small number of cases.
Salzburg said his office planned to put out a statement on Wednesday advising people who have gone through the procedure to expunge their misdemeanor records of the court's decision. He said the ruling means that if such people now have guns, they "may be viewed by federal authorities as being in violation of federal firearms law."
The U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division in Washington represented the BATF in the lawsuit. Charles Miller, spokesman for the division, said Wednesday the office had no comment on the ruling.
The 2004 Wyoming law at the center of the lawsuit allows people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to petition in state court to expunge their conviction and restore their gun rights. The law requires that petitioners must have completed probation, and it limits people to just one such request.
The Wyoming Attorney General's Office said last year that Wyoming courts expunged 63 misdemeanor convictions from 2005 through last October. Salzburg said Wednesday that only one person with an expunged record had gone on to receive a state-issued concealed weapons permit and said at least two other such applications are pending.
The BATF objected to a provision of the state law that specified that an "expunged" conviction would be kept by the state Division of Criminal Investigation and could be used to enhance penalties for future domestic violence convictions. The BATF said that conviction records weren't truly expunged if they were kept on the books for any purpose.
Federal law requires gun dealers to perform an instant background check of prospective purchasers through a national database unless the buyer has a state-issued concealed weapon permit. The BATF said Wyoming's law could allow people to get a concealed weapons permit even though they wouldn't qualify under federal standards.
Wyoming sued the BATF over its threat to reject all Wyoming-issued concealed carry permits as a substitute for background checks. In May 2007, U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson of Wyoming rejected the state's claims that the federal agency had arbitrarily rejected the state law.
The state's lawsuit has attracted national attention from groups on both sides of the gun-control debate at both the federal district court and appellate court levels.
Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington said Wednesday his group regards Tuesday's appeals court ruling as a victory for public safety. The center had filed papers in court in support of the BATF's position.
"We should not make it easier for dangerous abusers to get firearms," Vice said. "And we've seen that domestic violence abuse cases are extremely dangerous when guns are involved."
The Gun Owners Foundation and the National Rifle Association had filed papers in court supporting the state's position.
Herb Titus, lawyer for the Gun Owners Foundation, said Wednesday his group is disappointed with the appeals court decision.
"We think it's wrong," Titus said. "We think this is a matter of state right -- that Congress intended that the states have the right to define expungement according to state policy and state purposes, and obviously, the 10th Circuit disagrees."
Mike Blonigen, Casper district attorney and president of the Wyoming Prosecutors Association, said Wednesday that his office has been advising people interested in petitioning for restoration of their gun rights that a decision on the case was pending. The state law requires prosecutors to review restoration petitions.
Blonigen said the Wyoming Legislature may choose to change the law to address whether conviction records are truly expunged.
"I think it's one of these situations, where if you're going to call it an expungement, it has to have all the characteristics of an expungement, and frankly this law didn't get there," Blonigen said. "You can't say you're going to take it away for these purposes, but not for these three purposes over there."
> Posted by Records Removal Services. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)