Ex Parte J.C.D.
13-16-00534-CV
| Tex. App. | Aug 3, 2017Background
- In Nov. 2006, J.C.D. was arrested; robbery charge later dismissed, and he pleaded guilty to assault causing bodily injury, receiving two years deferred-adjudication community supervision.
- In Feb. 2016 J.C.D. petitioned to expunge records of the robbery arrest; the Department of Public Safety opposed, arguing expunction unavailable because he served community supervision arising from the same arrest.
- The trial court granted the expunction on March 11, 2016; the Department filed a restricted appeal within six months.
- The appellate court reviewed statutory interpretation de novo and examined whether error was apparent on the face of the record for a restricted appeal.
- The court concluded the unit of expunction is the entire arrest; because at least one charge from the arrest resulted in court-ordered community supervision, expunction of the arrest is prohibited.
- The appellate court reversed and rendered judgment denying the expunction petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether expunction is available when any offense arising from the arrest resulted in court-ordered community supervision | J.C.D.: may expunge records of the dismissed robbery charge because that charge resulted in no conviction | DPS: expunction is unavailable because the arrest produced another charge (assault) that resulted in deferred adjudication community supervision; expunction applies to the whole arrest | Held: Unit of expunction is the entire arrest; because community supervision was imposed for an offense arising from the arrest, expunction is barred |
| Whether the Department satisfied requirements for a restricted appeal | N/A (appellant compliance) | DPS: timely filed notice, was a party, did not participate in the hearing, and preserved only facial error review | Held: Department met restricted-appeal requirements; error apparent on face of record (so appeal proper) |
Key Cases Cited
- Nixon v. Warner Commc’n, 435 U.S. 589 (constitutional presumption of public access to judicial records)
- Dallas Morning News v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 842 S.W.2d 655 (Tex. 1992) (public access presumption in Texas)
- In re State Bar, 440 S.W.3d 621 (Tex. 2014) (expunction is a narrow exception to public-records presumption)
- S.J. v. State, 438 S.W.3d 838 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2014) (unit of expunction is the entire arrest; all charges arising from arrest must meet article 55.01)
- Ex parte Vega, 510 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2016) (same rule: arrest-wide analysis for expunction)
- Travis County Dist. Atty. v. M.M., 354 S.W.3d 920 (Tex. App.—Austin 2011) (expunction applies only if every charge arising from arrest satisfies statute)
- Ex parte Elliot, 815 S.W.2d 251 (Tex. 1991) (appellate relief as to expunction applies to all law-enforcement agencies named in the expunction order)