194 A.3d 415
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2018Background
- In 2014 Reid was charged with second-degree assault; the State entered a nolle prosequi months later.
- In 2016 Reid sued the State seeking declaratory relief that public dissemination of his nolle prosequi disposition on the Maryland Case Search violated his rights under Article 24 (and Article 25) of the Maryland Declaration of Rights and caused stigma and monetary harm.
- Reid asked the court to order the State to remove nolle prosequi and not-guilty dispositions from Case Search without petition and to find he was entitled to expungement without cost.
- The State moved to dismiss, arguing the Criminal Procedure expungement statute (Md. Code, Crim. Proc. §§ 10-101–10-109) provides the special, primary remedy and that no constitutional right to automatic expungement exists.
- The circuit court granted the motion, concluding Reid must pursue the statutory expungement process before seeking declaratory relief.
- On appeal the Court of Special Appeals affirmed, holding the expungement statute is the primary remedial scheme and bars a declaratory-judgment action seeking the same relief; constitutional challenges may be raised after the statutory process is exhausted or on appeal from an expungement denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court erred by dismissing Reid's declaratory-judgment complaint | Reid: Case Search publication and the burdens of the expungement process (fees, attorney costs, delays) create stigma and a deprivation of rights under Articles 24 and 25, so declaratory relief is appropriate | State: The Criminal Procedure expungement statute provides a special/primary remedy for removing records; declaratory relief is inappropriate under Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-409(b) | Court: Dismissal proper — statutory expungement scheme is the primary remedy and precludes declaratory judgment now |
| Whether automatic removal or cost-free expungement is constitutionally required for nolle prosequi dispositions | Reid: Requiring petition and attendant costs is an unconstitutional burden as-applied where charges were not prosecuted | State: No constitutional right to automatic expungement; fees/requirements are legislative policy and sovereign-immunity issues may limit monetary relief | Court: Did not reach the constitutional merits; plaintiff must first pursue statutory expungement; constitutional claims may be raised later if statute-denial occurs |
| Whether declaratory-judgment doctrine allows bypassing the statutory process | Reid: Declaratory relief is available to settle rights and should be allowed here | State: Declaratory Judgment Act disallows actions where a special statutory remedy exists (Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-409(b)) | Court: Declaratory relief is supplemental and disfavored where a comprehensive statutory remedy exists; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether expungement statute applies to nolle prosequi and affords adequate process | Reid: Implied criticism that statute imposes burdens preventing practical relief | State: Statute explicitly authorizes petitions for expungement after nolle prosequi and provides procedures and enforcement | Court: Statute expressly covers nolle prosequi and mandates procedure; it is the intended, primary remedy |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 183 Md. 385 (discussing Declaratory Judgment Act as supplemental, not superseding, existing remedies)
- Doe v. Wheaton Police Dep’t, 273 Md. 262 (equity jurisdiction to expunge where no statutory remedy existed)
- Utilities, Inc. of Maryland v. Washington Suburban Sanitary Comm’n, 362 Md. 37 (Declaratory Judgment Act bars declaratory relief where special statutory remedy is primary)
- Renaissance Centro Columbia, LLC v. Broida, 421 Md. 474 (statutory administrative remedy precludes declaratory judgment)
- Converge Servs. Group, LLC v. Curran, 383 Md. 462 (limitations on availability of declaratory relief)
- Ward v. State, 37 Md. App. 34 (expungement timing distinctions for nolle prosequi not unconstitutional as applied)
- Jackson v. State, 124 Md. App. 59 (review of expungement denial raising constitutional claims)
- Heavenly Days Crematorium, LLC v. Harris, Smariga & Assocs., Inc., 433 Md. 558 (pleading standard on motions to dismiss)