2015 Ohio 3153
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- In 1996 Clemens pleaded guilty to attempted robbery (third-degree felony) after a Target shoplifting incident that led to a struggle in the parking lot in which two people were injured.
- In May 2014 Clemens applied under R.C. 2953.32 to have the record of that conviction sealed; the State objected, citing R.C. 2953.36(C).
- R.C. 2953.36(C) bars sealing of convictions that are "offenses of violence;" R.C. 2901.01(A)(9)(d) lists R.C. 2911.02 (robbery) and attempts as offenses of violence.
- The trial court relied in part on Eighth District precedent (State v. V.M.D.) and the underlying facts, and granted the sealing application after finding Clemens rehabilitated.
- The State appealed, arguing the statutory definition in R.C. 2901.01 unambiguously makes attempted robbery an "offense of violence," so Clemens is ineligible to seal under R.C. 2953.36(C).
- The Tenth District reversed: it held the statutes’ plain language controls and that attempted robbery, as defined by R.C. 2901.01, is an offense of violence barring sealing under R.C. 2953.36(C).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Clemens is eligible to seal an attempted-robbery conviction | R.C. 2901.01 defines attempted robbery as an "offense of violence," so R.C. 2953.36(C) bars sealing | Court should look to underlying facts (per V.M.D.)—the record does not "clearly reveal" violent conduct; Clemens is rehabilitated | Held for Plaintiff. The court applied R.C. 2901.01’s categorical definition; attempted robbery is an offense of violence and is ineligible for sealing under R.C. 2953.36(C). |
Key Cases Cited
- Henry v. Central Natl. Bank, 16 Ohio St.2d 16 (1968) (statutory interpretation focuses on legislative intent and plain language)
- Summerville v. Forest Park, 128 Ohio St.3d 221 (2010) (apply unambiguous statute as written)
- Armstrong v. John R. Jurgensen Co., 136 Ohio St.3d 58 (2013) (must give effect to all statutory language)
- State v. Simon, 87 Ohio St.3d 531 (2000) (expungement is a statutory privilege, not a right)
- State v. Pariag, 137 Ohio St.3d 81 (2013) (terminology: "sealing" of records under statutory scheme)