In re the Expunction of J.S.
2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 405
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- In June 2011, J.S. was acquitted of criminal attempted murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
- On July 27, 2011, J.S. moved for expunction of arrest and prosecution records; the court granted expunction on July 28, 2011.
- On September 2, 2011, the State filed an unverified motion to undo the expunction; on September 9, 2011, the State filed a sworn motion to modify.
- The State claimed notice of the expunction was not provided until August 29, 2011, more than twenty days after signing.
- The trial court held a hearing on September 15, 2011 and granted the modification
- The appellate court vacated the modification and reinstated the July 28, 2011 expunction order, concluding the State failed to satisfy Rule 306a(5) and the court’s plenary power had expired.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to modify after plenary power expired. | J.S. | State | Yes; modification void for lack of jurisdiction. |
| Whether the State satisfied Rule 306a(5) requirements. | J.S. | State | No; Rule 306a(5) not proven. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Laredo v. Schuble, 943 S.W.2d 124 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1997) (requires negating actual knowledge to trigger Rule 306a(5))
- Womack-Humphreys Architects, Inc. v. Barrasso, 886 S.W.2d 809 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994) (requires both notice and actual knowledge to negate jurisdiction)
- Gillis, Mem’l Hosp. of Galveston County v. Gillis, 741 S.W.2d 364 (Tex. 1987) (compliance with Rule 306a is jurisdictional prerequisite)
- Grondoma v. Sutton, 991 S.W.2d 90 (Tex.App.-Austin 1998) (voidness when jurisdiction not reinvoked)
- Nathan A. Watson Co. v. Employers Mut. Cas. Co., 218 S.W.3d 797 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2007) (establishes date-of-knowledge burden under 306a(5))
- Carrera v. Marsh, 847 S.W.2d 337 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1993) (discusses sworn-move requirements under 306a)