State v. Porter, 2012 Ohio 5541

Porter, pro se, seeks to seal the record of five 2001 forgery convictions following a 2011 application in Champaign County Court of Common Pleas.
She previously pled guilty to five forgery counts; the theft charge was dismissed as part of the plea, and she completed three years of community control in 2004.
At the 2011 hearing, the State disputed her eligibility, noting a 1982 domestic violence misdemeanor and arguing the forgery convictions should be counted under multiple-conviction rules.
Porter claimed she had rehabilitated and sought sealing to improve employment and educational opportunities.
In January 2012, the trial court denied the sealing request, and Porter appealed challenging the denial.
The court held Porter was not a first offender and thus not eligible to seal under the statute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is Porter a first offender under R.C. 2953.31(A)?	Porter contends she qualifies for sealing.	Porter is not a first offender because of the 1982 domestic violence conviction.	No; Porter is not a first offender.
Do the forgery convictions count as one or multiple for eligibility?	Not explicitly contested on appeal; Porter argues rehabilitated status supports sealing.	The forgery convictions arise from related acts and are counted in determining eligibility.	The court treated the issue as part of eligibility and upheld denial based on first-offender status.
What standard governs sealing decisions—abuse of discretion or statutory interpretation?	Porter argues the court erred in applying the statute.	Review is for abuse of discretion unless interpreting the statute.	Statutory interpretation requires de novo review; otherwise, abuse of discretion applies.

State v. Stephens, 195 Ohio App.3d 724 (2011-Ohio-5562) (sealing is a privilege, not a right; eligibility required)
State v. Simon, 87 Ohio St.3d 531 (2000) (eligibility for sealing depends on statutes in force)
State v. Futrall, 123 Ohio St.3d 498 (2009-Ohio-5590) (interpretation of sealing statute without deference to trial court)