State v. Porter, 2014 Ohio 4068

Nancy Porter was convicted in July 2007 of two counts of fifth-degree felony forgery.
On October 28, 2013, Porter filed an R.C. 2953.32 application to seal her felony convictions (eligible offender; >3 years since final discharge).
The State objected, arguing Porter's conduct (forging an employer/elderly person’s signature on two checks) and the seriousness of dishonesty crimes created legitimate governmental interests in retaining the records.
A hearing was set; Porter did not appear and presented no evidence beyond a boilerplate recitation that she met statutory requirements.
The trial court nevertheless ordered the records sealed, stating the sealing was "consistent with the public interest."
The Tenth District reversed, holding the trial court abused its discretion because Porter failed to meet her burden to show her interests in sealing outweighed the government's interests; the case was remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by sealing Porter's felony record under R.C. 2953.32 without evidence balancing applicant and governmental interests	State: Yes — Porter failed to demonstrate any particular need; government has legitimate interests in maintaining records of dishonesty crimes	Porter: Eligible offender; met statutory timing and other requirements (application recited compliance)	Reversed — applicant bears burden to prove her interests equal/greater than government’s; Porter presented no evidence or testimony, so trial court abused its discretion and order is vacated and remanded

State v. Boykin, 138 Ohio St.3d 97 (2013) (expungement is a privilege; should be granted only when statutory requirements are met)
State v. Hamilton, 75 Ohio St.3d 636 (1996) (expungement is an act of grace created by the state)
State v. Futrall, 123 Ohio St.3d 498 (2009) (expungement is a privilege, not a right)
State v. Pariag, 137 Ohio St.3d 81 (2013) (discussing standards for sealing criminal records)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined as unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable)