2016 Ohio 823
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Gyugo was convicted of a tier-two offense under Ohio law, ensuring a ten-year disqualification from FCBDD employment, with records sealed in 1992.
- In 1995 Gyugo applied for a FCBDD training specialist job and was hired; a background check later failed to reveal the sealed conviction.
- Gyugo repeatedly completed renewal applications in 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008, answering “No” to questions about past convictions, even though sealed records existed.
- In 2013 FCBDD performed a criminal-record check and learned of the sealed conviction, leading to notice and pre-disciplinary proceedings and his termination on grounds of dishonesty and misrepresentation.
- SPBR upheld the termination; the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirmed, and Gyugo appealed, challenging expungement-related viability of the disclosure requirements.
- The majority held the disclosure duty applicable and that Gyugo’s “No” responses were not excusable under the sealing statutes, affirming the lower courts' rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sealed conviction disclosure can justify termination for dishonesty | Gyugo relied on sealing to justify no disclosure. | FCBDD could require disclosure of sealed offenses when relevant to the position. | Disclosing sealed conviction was not excused; termination sustained. |
| Whether FCBDD's application questions violated sealing laws by seeking sealed records | Questions improperly compelled disclosure of sealed records, conflicting with expungement. | Questions were within FCBDD's rulemaking authority and related to disqualifying offenses. | Questions allowed under statute; but specific 2008 disclosure requirement was properly tied to disqualifying offenses. |
| Scope of review and de novo evaluation in agency appeals | Limited review should apply to expungement-related issues. | De novo review is appropriate for legal questions given undisputed facts. | Court conducted de novo review on legal questions; affirmed lower court findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Our Place, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Dev., 63 Ohio St.3d 570 (1992) (expungement and confidentiality of sealed records; limits on disclosure)
- Pons v. Ohio State Med. Bd., 66 Ohio St.3d 619 (1993) (abuse of discretion standard; deference to agency decisions on evidentiary sufficiency)
- Leslie v. Ohio Dept. of Dev., 2007-Ohio-1170 (10th Dist.) (de novo review for legal questions when facts are undisputed)
- Tres Amigos, Inc. v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 2014-Ohio-5047 (10th Dist.) (standard of review in agency appeals; reliability and probative weight of evidence)