v. E. v. Travis County District Attorney, 500 S.W.3d 652

In 2006 V.E. was arrested and charged with aggravated assault, burglary of a habitation (felonies), and possession of a prohibited weapon (switchblade, misdemeanor); he later pleaded to disorderly conduct (Class C) in exchange for forfeiting the knife and dismissal of the switchblade charge; the felonies were dismissed when the victim could not be located.
V.E. filed for expunction under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 55.01(a)(2), seeking removal of all records from the 2006 arrest.
The Travis County DA opposed, arguing expunction is unavailable because the arrest ultimately resulted in a final conviction (disorderly conduct).
A magistrate recommended denial; the district court adopted that recommendation and denied the petition. V.E. appealed.
The court analyzed the statutory text of article 55.01(a)(2), focusing on whether the phrase “unless the offense is a Class C misdemeanor” modifies the final-conviction requirement or the separate prohibition on court-ordered community supervision.
The court concluded article 55.01 is arrest-based (all charges from one arrest are treated together) and held the “unless” clause applies only to the community-supervision prohibition; because V.E. had a final conviction from the arrest, expunction was unavailable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the phrase “unless the offense is a Class C misdemeanor” in art. 55.01(a)(2) modifies the final-conviction prohibition or the community-supervision prohibition	V.E.: the "unless" phrase should modify the final-conviction clause, allowing expunction when any resulting conviction is a Class C misdemeanor	State: the "unless" phrase modifies only the community-supervision clause; a final conviction from the arrest bars expunction	Court: "unless" modifies the community-supervision clause only; a final conviction arising from the arrest bars expunction
Whether expunction is available for some charges from an arrest when another charge from the same arrest resulted in conviction	V.E.: sought to expunge records arising from the arrest despite plea to disorderly conduct	State: expunction is arrest-based; if any conviction resulted from the arrest, expunction of records from that arrest is unavailable	Court: expunction is arrest-based; petitioner cannot expunge only some charges when the arrest produced a conviction

State v. Shumake, 199 S.W.3d 279 (Tex. 2006) (standard and de novo review for statutory construction)
Lexington Ins. Co. v. Strayhorn, 209 S.W.3d 83 (Tex. 2006) (text as primary indicator of legislative intent)
Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers, 282 S.W.3d 433 (Tex. 2009) (use plain meaning of statutory text unless context dictates otherwise)
City of Rockwall v. Hughes, 246 S.W.3d 621 (Tex. 2008) (context and ordinary meaning in statutory construction)
Texas Lottery Comm’n v. State Bank of DeQueen, 325 S.W.3d 628 (Tex. 2010) (presumption Legislature chose words deliberately)
Texas Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. G.B.E., 459 S.W.3d 622 (Tex. App.—Austin 2014, pet. denied) (construing art. 55.01(a)(2) and holding the "unless" clause limits the community-supervision prohibition)
Heine v. Texas Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 92 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. App.—Austin 2002, pet. denied) (confirming expunction is a statutory privilege, not a common-law right)
S.J. v. State, 438 S.W.3d 838 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2014, no pet.) (support for arrest-based expunction scheme)