State v. Gordon
2013 Ohio 5143
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- In 1993 Gordon struck Aaron Dawson with a metal object; Dawson died from a single blow. Gordon pleaded guilty to negligent homicide, a first-degree misdemeanor.
- In December 2012 Gordon applied under R.C. 2953.32(A) to seal the misdemeanor conviction; the State objected under R.C. 2953.36(F), which bars sealing offenses where the victim was under 18.
- At a March 8, 2013 hearing the prosecutor asserted the victim was a juvenile and offered to produce records; defense counsel said no evidence in the record proved the victim was under 18.
- The trial court indicated it would review evidence but ultimately issued an entry on March 21, 2013 sealing the record without making findings about the victim’s age or referencing the State’s proffered evidence.
- The State moved to correct the record, attaching an affidavit stating that on March 14 it produced a death certificate and newspaper clippings to the court; the trial court granted the motion to correct the record and the State appealed the sealing order.
- The Tenth District reversed, holding the trial court abused its discretion by failing to determine and record the victim’s age before sealing, and remanded for the court to make findings based on the submitted evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 2953.36(F) forbids sealing when the victim was under 18 | The victim here was a minor, so the statute precludes sealing | No evidence in the record proved the victim was under 18; State never proved age at the expungement hearing | Trial court abused discretion by not determining/recording victim's age; case remanded to make findings and re-decide sealing request |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ritchie, 174 Ohio App.3d 582 (2007) (expungement is a statutory privilege and eligibility requirements must be strictly met)
- State v. Simon, 87 Ohio St.3d 531 (1999) (trial court must examine record and may need to inquire beyond the record to determine expungement eligibility)
- State v. Hamilton, 75 Ohio St.3d 636 (1996) (expungement is an act of grace, not a right)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse of discretion standard defined)
- State v. Hilbert, 145 Ohio App.3d 824 (2001) (standard for appellate review of sealing decisions referenced)
- State v. Derugen, 110 Ohio App.3d 408 (1996) (questions of law reviewed de novo)