State v. Blair, 62 N.E.3d 201

Ahkeyya Blair was acquitted after a bench trial of aggravated robbery and robbery.
After acquittal, Blair applied to seal the criminal-case records under R.C. 2953.52.
The State opposed sealing, asserting a "criminal proceeding" remained pending because Blair was on community control for a separate misdemeanor menacing conviction.
The municipal court denied the sealing application on the basis that community control remained in effect and told Blair she could reapply after termination of community control.
Blair appealed, arguing that "probation" (she characterized her status as such) is not a criminal sentence and thus no criminal proceeding was pending.
The court reviewed the legal question de novo and affirmed the denial, holding community control is part of the criminal proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a person found not guilty can obtain sealing when they remain under community control for another conviction (i.e., whether "criminal proceedings are pending")	State: community control is part of the criminal process, so a criminal proceeding is pending and sealing is premature	Blair: probation/community-control status is not a sentence or criminal proceeding; thus no pending criminal proceeding and sealing should be granted	Held: community control is part of the sentence and criminal proceedings; because Blair remained on community control, a criminal proceeding was pending and sealing was properly denied

State v. Futrall, 123 Ohio St.3d 498 (2009) (de novo review of legal questions about sealing statute)
Gangon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973) (probation-revocation proceedings not a stage of criminal prosecution under prior law)
State v. Jones, 60 Ohio App.2d 178 (1st Dist. 1978) (discussing probation and revocation proceedings under former law)
State v. Fraley, 105 Ohio St.3d 13 (2004) (after community-control violation the court re-sentences defendant)