STATE OF OHIO v. C.K.
No. 99886
Cоurt of Appeals of Ohio, EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
November 21, 2013
2013-Ohio-5135
SEALED
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF JOURNAL ENTRY
Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CR-529206
BEFORE: Celebrezze, P.J., E.A. Gallagher, J., and E.T. Gallagher, J.
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: November 21, 2013
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: Diane Smilanick
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
The Justice Center
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Nicholas A. DiCello
William B. Eadie
Spangenberg Shibley & Liber, L.L.P.
1001 Lakeside Avenue, East
Suite 1700
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., P.J.:
{1} This is an appeal by the state regarding the trial сourt‘s granting of appellee‘s motion to seal all official records of his arrest. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
I. Factual and Procedural History
{2} On October 13, 2009, defendant-appellee, C.K.,1 was indicted by the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury for murder in violation of
{4} At the conclusion of trial, the jury convicted appellee of murder in violation of
{5} On February 5, 2013, appellee filed an application to seal all official records and a mоtion to dismiss the underlying criminal charges with prejudice. The state filed a brief in opposition to the application for sealing records of conviction on March 22, 2013.
{6} At the hearing, appellee argued that he had a legitimate interest in sealing the records sо that he could obtain gainful employment. In opposing the motion, the state argued that it has a legitimate governmental interest in maintaining criminal records such as appellee‘s so that the public is aware of who has an arrest record or has been convicted of certain crimes.
{7} At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court determined that appеllee‘s interest in sealing the official record of his criminal proceedings outweighed any legitimate government interest the state had in keeping them open. Accordingly, the trial cоurt granted appellee‘s application to seal all official records, but denied his motion to dismiss the underlying criminal charges with prejudice.
{8} The state now brings this timely appeal, rаising one assignment of error for review.
II. Law and Analysis
{9} In its sole assignment of error, the state argues that the trial court abused its discretion when it granted appellee‘s application to seal аll official records. Specifically, the state contends that appellee was not eligible to have his records sealed because there is no statute of limitations for the crime of murder. For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit to the state‘s argument.
{11}
the court shall set a date for a hearing and shall notify the prosecutor in the case of the hearing on the application. The prosecutor may object to the granting of the application by filing an objection with the court рrior to the date set for the hearing. The prosecutor shall specify in the objection the reasons the prosecutor believes justify a denial of the application.
{12} In considering the application pursuant to
- (i) Determine whether the person was found not guilty in the case, or the complaint, indictment, or information in the case was dismissed * * *; (ii) If the complaint, indictment, or information in the case was dismissed, detеrmine whether it was dismissed with prejudice or without prejudice and, if it was dismissed without prejudice, determine whether the relevant statute of limitations has expired;
- Determine whether criminal proceedings are pending against the person;
- If the prosecutor has filed an objection in accordance with division (B)(1) of this section, consider the reasons against granting the application specified by the prosecutor in the objection;
Weigh the interests of the person in having the official records pertaining to the case sealed against the legitimаte needs, if any, of the government to maintain those records.
{13} If the court determines, after complying with division (B)(2), that (1) the complaint, indictment, or information in the case was dismissed, (2) that no criminal proceedings are pending against the person, and (3) that the interest of the person having the records pertaining to the case are not outweighed by any legitimate governmental needs to maintain such records, then “the court shall issue an order directing that all official records pertaining to the case be sealed and that * * * the proceedings in the case be deemed not to have occurred.”
{14} In the case at hand, it is undisputed that the underlying criminal complaint was dismissed and that no charges were pending against appellee at the time he filed his application to seal his criminal record. Moreover, the record reflects that the trial court adequately balanced the competing interests оf the parties before determining that appellee‘s interest in obtaining gainful employment was not outweighed by the legitimate needs of the government to maintain the records.
{15} Becаuse the trial court properly weighed the relevant factors delineated under
{16} Finally, we find no merit to the stаte‘s argument that the trial court‘s judgment was improper based on the fact that the statute of limitations on the dismissed
{17} Based on the foregoing, we overrule the state‘s sole assignment of error. However, we note that the court‘s journal entry incorrectly refers to the expungement of appellee‘s “conviction,” and incorrectly cites
{18} Judgment affirmed and case remanded. The clerk of the court of appeals is instructed to reseal the trial court record and to seal the court of appeals record in this case.
It is ordered that appellee recovеr from appellant costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to сarry this judgment into execution.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., PRESIDING JUDGE
EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., and
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR