State v. Bell, 2020 Ohio 3750

In 2011 Bell pled guilty to an amended count of aggravated trafficking (third-degree felony) and a forfeiture specification; he was placed on three years community control.
Supervision was terminated and civil rights restored on October 30, 2014.
On July 26, 2019 Bell filed an application to have his conviction records sealed under R.C. 2953.31–.35, claiming eligibility under R.C. 2953.31(A)(1)(b).
The state opposed, arguing Bell was not an "eligible offender" (pointing to prior out-of-state convictions and statutory limits on felony degrees); the trial court denied the application by a one-line entry on August 1, 2019, without a hearing or written findings.
After Bell appealed, the trial court filed a presentence investigation report under seal; the Sixth District found the record silent as to why no hearing occurred and concluded the trial court failed to comply with R.C. 2953.32.
The appellate court reversed and remanded, ordering the trial court to schedule a hearing, determine eligibility, make the statutory findings on the record, and then decide whether expungement should be granted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Bell)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the trial court erred by denying the expungement application without holding a hearing and making statutory findings under R.C. 2953.32	A hearing was required under R.C. 2953.32(B); the court must determine eligibility and make findings on the record	A hearing is unnecessary when the court can determine ineligibility as a matter of law from the record/report	Reversed: hearing and statutory findings required; trial court abused its discretion by taking no action and issuing no findings
Whether the trial court could rely on the sealed probation/PSI report (and absence of proof of an out-of-state expungement) to deny eligibility without a hearing	Bell asserted a Mississippi conviction had been expunged, making him eligible, and the court should have investigated and held a hearing	State argued the court properly relied on the probation report and the absence of proof of a Mississippi expungement in the record	Held for remand: the record is silent; trial court must resolve eligibility at a hearing and may not deny without required findings or by adding evidence only on appeal

Wright v. State, 191 Ohio App.3d 647, 947 N.E.2d 246 (2010) (discusses requirement for hearing and specific findings in expungement proceedings)
Ishmail v. Ramey, 54 Ohio St.2d 402, 377 N.E.2d 500 (1978) (appellate courts cannot add matters to the record that were not part of the trial court proceedings)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (1983) (defines abuse of discretion standard)