State v. Mills
2011 Ohio 377
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Mills pled guilty to theft of drugs in 2002 and completed an intervention-in-lieu-of-conviction, resulting in dismissal of the case.
- In 2009 Mills moved to seal his criminal records related to the theft charge; the trial court denied, citing lack of first-offender status due to a prior OMVI.
- The trial court held sealing is available only to first offenders under R.C. 2953.31-36 and found Mills not eligible.
- Mills argued the sealing statute applies and, at minimum, that he should be treated as a first offender; the court should liberally construe pro se filings.
- The appellate court conducted de novo review of Mills’s first-offender status and found Mills has only one conviction (OMVI) and qualifies as a first offender for sealing purposes.
- The court reversed the denial, held Mills eligible to seal the theft-of-drugs records, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mills qualifies as a first offender for sealing. | Mills: first offender status should be recognized under 2953.31. | State: prior OMVI prevents first-offender status. | Mills is a first offender; eligible to seal. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Derugen, 110 Ohio App.3d 408 (1996) (de novo review of first-offender status)
- State v. Sufronko, 105 Ohio App.3d 504 (1995) (statutory interpretation with respect to expungement)
- State v. Hilbert, 145 Ohio App.3d 824 (2001) (liberal construction of expungement statutes)
- Gains v. Rossi, 86 Ohio St.3d 620 (1999) (remedial expungement provisions are liberally construed)