In the Matter of the Expungement of the Criminal Records of G.P.B.
91 A.3d 648
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2014Background
- In 1999 petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of third-degree conspiracy and three counts of third-degree making gifts to public servants for agreeing to make campaign contributions on April 19 and April 20, 1999, to influence municipal votes.
- The conspiracy conviction was merged into the three substantive counts; petitioner received concurrent three-year probationary terms with a 30-day county jail stay and other penalties.
- In November 2012 petitioner sought expungement under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(a) (expungement available to a person "convicted of a crime" who has not been convicted of any prior or subsequent "crime" after ten years).
- The trial court granted expungement, concluding the multiple offenses over two days were "so closely tied together" (invoking the ‘‘crime-spree’’ concept) and thus eligible for expungement as a single judgment.
- The State appealed, arguing petitioner was convicted of multiple crimes committed on separate dates and therefore ineligible under the statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether multiple offenses committed on different days but encompassed in one judgment can be treated as "a crime" for expungement under N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(a) | Petitioner: offenses were part of a single, closely related scheme (crime-spree), thus effectively one crime for expungement | State: petitioner was convicted of multiple separate crimes on different dates, precluding expungement under the statute | Court reversed: statute unambiguously bars expungement when petitioner was convicted of multiple crimes committed on separate occasions; "crime-spree" doctrine inapplicable |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Fontana, 146 N.J. Super. 264 (App. Div. 1976) (original articulation of the "crime-spree" principle under earlier statute)
- In re Ross, 400 N.J. Super. 117 (App. Div. 2008) (interpreting N.J.S.A. 2C:52-2(a) to require that separate crimes on separate occasions bar expungement)
- In re Criminal Records of R.Z., 429 N.J. Super. 295 (App. Div. 2013) (applied Ross; petitioner failed to prove crimes were committed concurrently rather than on separate occasions)