Ex Parte Matthew E. Green
373 S.W.3d 111
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Green was arrested on September 5, 2006 for unlawfully carrying a weapon and pled no contest to a misdemeanor with six months deferred adjudication.
- On October 10, 2010 Green filed a petition to expunge his criminal records related to this arrest.
- DPS answered with a general denial and argued Green was not entitled to expunction because of the deferred adjudication.
- On March 24, 2011 the trial court ordered expunction of Green's arrest records.
- The DPS appealed, contending Green was ineligible for expunction due to court-ordered community supervision under Article 42.12.
- The court ultimately held that Green was not entitled to expunction because deferred adjudication constitutes court-ordered community supervision, making him ineligible under Article 55.01.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether deferred adjudication bars expunction under Article 55.01 | Green (plaintiff) argues no court-ordered supervision occurred | DPS argues deferred adjudication is community supervision, barring expunction | Green not entitled; deferred adjudication constitutes supervision |
| Whether evidence shows no court-ordered community supervision | Green contends there was no supervision due to unsupervised probation | DPS asserts fines and conditions created supervision under Article 42.12 | Evidence shows supervision via fine and conditions; thus not entitled to expunction |
| Whether unsupervised deferred adjudication defeats expunction eligibility | Green hoped unsupervised status would permit expunction | Court-ordered supervision exists despite unsupervised designation | Unsup. designation does not defeat supervision; expunction denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Heine v. Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 92 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. App.—Austin 2002) (expunction review standards; statutory privilege)
- Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (law governs interpretation and application of rules)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standards for reviewing evidentiary sufficiency)
- Knight, 813 S.W.2d 210 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991) (expunction burden requires statutory satisfaction)
- Wallace, 63 S.W.3d 805 (Tex. App.—Austin 2001) (deferred adjudication constitutes community supervision)
- Nail, 305 S.W.3d 673 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010) (community supervision includes a sentence with a fine as a condition of deferred adjudication)
- Dahlquist, No. 01-08-00559-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (deferred adjudication is court-ordered community supervision)
- J.H.J., 274 S.W.3d 803 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (expunction proceeding is civil in nature)
- Ex Parte Elliot, 815 S.W.2d 251 (Tex. 1991) (reversal of expunction orders applies broadly to respondents)