Ex parte Vega
510 S.W.3d 544
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Jose Luis Vega was arrested for indecency with a child and indicted on three counts; he pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to endangering a child (third-degree felony) and received a six-year sentence while two counts were dismissed.
- Vega filed an ex parte petition to expunge "all records and files relating to the arrest," asserting the charges were dismissed, amended, or otherwise did not result in a final conviction.
- The Texas Department of Public Safety (the Department) answered, asserting Vega was ineligible for expunction because one charge resulted in a final conviction (via the guilty plea to a lesser offense) and the statute of limitations had not expired; the Department did not participate in the expunction hearing.
- The trial court granted expunction under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 55.01(a)(2) and ordered all records of the arrest expunged.
- The Department filed a restricted appeal arguing error was apparent on the face of the record because a final conviction existed for a charge arising from the arrest.
- The court of appeals reversed, holding Vega was ineligible for expunction because article 55.01(a) treats the arrest (not individual charges) as the unit of relief and he had a final conviction arising from that arrest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether expunction is available when a defendant pleads to a lesser-included offense arising from the same arrest | Vega: Expunction may remove records of the specific charge (indecency with a child) because that charge did not result in a final conviction | Dept.: A plea to a lesser-included offense arising from the arrest is a final conviction for purposes of art. 55.01(a) and bars expunction of records "relating to the arrest" | Held: A conviction on an offense arising from the arrest precludes expunction because the statute treats the arrest as the unit of relief; Vega was ineligible |
Key Cases Cited
- Alexander v. Lynda’s Boutique, 134 S.W.3d 845 (Tex. 2004) (restricted-appeal requirements and standards)
- Ginn v. Forrester, 282 S.W.3d 430 (Tex. 2009) (face-of-record error requirement for restricted appeals)
- Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. G.B.E., 459 S.W.3d 622 (Tex. App.—Austin 2014) (en banc) (expunction statute interpreted; standard of review)
- City of Rockwall v. Hughes, 246 S.W.3d 621 (Tex. 2008) (statutory interpretation principles)
- Ex parte Elliot, 815 S.W.2d 251 (Tex. 1991) (reversal of expunction order applies to all agencies named in the order)