S.J. v. State, 438 S.W.3d 838

S.J. petitioned (Sept. 2013) to expunge records of his Jan. 19, 2010 arrest for aggravated assault, asserting the charge was dismissed and the statute of limitations had expired.
The State produced a September 2010 motion dismissing the aggravated assault in connection with a plea: S.J. pled nolo contendere to terroristic threat in county court, receiving deferred adjudication/community supervision for 12 months.
The county criminal court’s order found evidence substantiated guilt for the terroristic threat; S.J. denied ever pleading guilty or admitting wrongdoing at the expunction hearing.
Trial court denied the expunction petition; S.J. appealed, arguing article 55.01’s requirements were satisfied as to the aggravated assault charge.
The State argued expunction is barred because the arrest resulted in court-ordered community supervision for a different charge arising from the same arrest (terroristic threat).
The appellate court considered whether chapter 55 authorizes expunction of records for individual charges arising from a single arrest or only for all records relating to the arrest as a whole.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether article 55.01 permits expunction of records for a single charge when multiple charges arose from the same arrest	S.J.: He met art. 55.01 requirements for aggravated assault (dismissed; no conviction; limitations expired) and thus may expunge records related to that charge	State: Chapter 55 is arrest-based; expunction must apply to all records relating to the arrest and is barred when any charge from the arrest resulted in court-ordered community supervision	The court held chapter 55 is arrest-based; expunction requires that all charges arising from the arrest meet art. 55.01 requirements; S.J. not entitled because he received deferred adjudication for a charge from the same arrest

Ex parte Cephus, 410 S.W.3d 416 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013) (standard of review for expunction denial)
Heine v. Texas Department of Public Safety, 92 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. App.—Austin 2002) (pet. denied) (petitioner bears burden to satisfy statutory expunction conditions)
Texas Department of Public Safety v. Nail, 305 S.W.3d 673 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010) (no pet.) (expunction is statutory privilege; purpose is to remove records of wrongful arrests)
Harris County Dist. Attorney’s Office v. J.T.S., 807 S.W.2d 572 (Tex. 1991) (expunction not intended for arrests followed by guilty pleas/probation)
Tex. Dep’t of Public Safety v. Dicken, 415 S.W.3d 476 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013) (arrest-based reading of art. 55.01; cannot expunge individual offenses arising from same arrest)
Travis County Dist. Attorney v. M.M., 354 S.W.3d 920 (Tex. App.—Austin 2011) (en banc) (statute addresses expunging records relating to an arrest, not separable charges)
Ex parte E.E.H., 869 S.W.2d 496 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1993) (writ denied) (contrasting older decision allowing partial expunction; court declined to follow)