Bolin v. State
459 S.W.3d 788
Ark.2015Background
- Bolin pleaded no contest in January 2011 to two misdemeanors and one Class D felony; sentenced to 90 days probation for misdemeanors and 3 years for the felony.
- Under the Community Punishment Act (CPA) in effect at sentencing, a defendant could petition to expunge immediately upon successful completion of probation.
- While Bolin was on felony probation, the General Assembly enacted the Comprehensive Criminal Record Sealing Act (CCRSA), effective January 1, 2014, which (among other changes) required waiting five years after sentence completion to seal Class D felony records and 60 days for misdemeanors.
- Bolin completed felony probation on January 19, 2014, petitioned to seal all records on March 19, 2014; the State did not respond and the circuit court denied the petition, applying the CCRSA five-year felony wait.
- On appeal the court considered (a) whether CCRSA applies retroactively to offenses committed before its effective date, (b) whether retroactive application violates ex post facto, and (c) whether Bolin’s misdemeanors are eligible to be sealed under the CCRSA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bolin) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CCRSA retroactively governs sealing of felony records | CCRSA should not apply to felonies committed before Jan 1, 2014; CPA in effect at offense should control | Legislature intended CCRSA to govern all sealing proceedings after effective date and superseded inconsistent provisions | CCRSA is not retroactive as to felonies; apply CPA to Bolin’s felony conviction (reversed and remanded) |
| Whether CCRSA retroactively governs sealing of misdemeanor records | (Implicit) CCRSA should not disadvantage him; eligibility determined by statute | CCRSA expressly made misdemeanor provision retroactive | CCRSA is retroactive as to misdemeanors; apply §16-90-1405 to Bolin’s misdemeanors (reversed and remanded) |
| Whether retroactive application would violate Ex Post Facto Clause | Retroactive change to sealing rules for felonies would be ex post facto | CCRSA is procedural/remedial and/or intended to apply | Moot as to felony (court found CCRSA not retroactive for felonies); no ex post facto analysis required |
| Whether sentencing order must expressly reference CPA to qualify for sealing | Not required; eligibility depends on meeting statutory elements, not a notation on the judgment | Argues sentencing order lacked explicit reference to CPA, so CPA-based sealing unavailable | Judgment notation not required; misdemeanors may be considered under CCRSA if statutory requirements met |
Key Cases Cited
- Bean v. Office of Child Support Enforcement, 340 Ark. 286 (2000) (presumption against retroactivity; legislative intent controls)
- Elders v. State, 321 Ark. 60 (1995) (retroactive application only when legislature expressly provides)
- State v. Murphy, 315 Ark. 68 (1993) (absent express provision, statute applies prospectively)
- Fulmer v. State, 337 Ark. 177 (1999) (eligibility for expungement depends on statutory requirements, not a technical notation on judgment)
- Landgraf v. USI Film Prod., 511 U.S. 244 (1994) (distinguishing prospective application from impermissible retroactive operation)