44 N.E.3d 791
Ind. Ct. App.2015Background
- In 1976 James D. Borel pleaded guilty to "entering to commit a felony" (amended from first-degree burglary) and was sentenced to 1–5 years; he served, was paroled, and completed parole.
- In June 2014 Borel petitioned to expunge the conviction records. The State objected, asserting he had not shown payment of fines, fees, and court costs imposed as part of the sentence.
- The trial court ordered Borel to prove payment; Borel sought clarification and discovery about the State’s nonpayment claim, which the court denied.
- Borel filed a summary-judgment motion and an affidavit stating the clerk’s office could find no record of outstanding fines or costs; the clerk likewise could not locate documents showing unpaid costs.
- The trial court summarily denied the expungement petition, concluding the original court lacked authority to waive costs and that Borel failed to prove payment (relying on a handwritten docket notation showing $37 in costs).
- Borel’s motion to correct error requesting an evidentiary hearing was denied; Borel appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Borel’s motion to correct error after summarily denying the expungement petition | Borel argued the court erred by denying the motion and that there was insufficient evidence he owed unpaid costs; he sought an evidentiary hearing | State argued Borel failed to prove payment of fines, fees, and costs required by statute and urged summary denial | Court held the denial was an abuse of discretion: the handwritten docket notation was insufficient evidence of imposed or unpaid costs and the clerk’s inability to locate records supported remand for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Ott v. State, 997 N.E.2d 1083 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (standard of review: denial of a motion to correct error reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- O'Connor v. State, 796 N.E.2d 1230 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (reversal where record lacked evidence supporting trial court’s factual basis)
- Trout v. State, 28 N.E.3d 267 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (discussed in opinion regarding expungement practice and naming conventions)