Richard S. v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 02 July 1973 |
| Citation | 347 N.Y.S.2d 54,300 N.E.2d 426,32 N.Y.2d 592 |
| Parties | , 300 N.E.2d 426 In the Matter of Richard S., Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Toby Golick, Jamaica, and Jonathan Weiss, New York City, for appellant.
Norman Redlich, Corp. Counsel, New York City (Alfred Weinstein and Stanley Buchsbaum, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Following a trial and successful appeals, the finding and adjudication that appellant, then 10 years old, was a 'Person in need of supervision' was reversed, on consent, for a failure of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and the proceeding was dismissed (Matter of Richard S., 27 N.Y.2d 802, 315 N.Y.S.2d 861, 264 N.E.2d 353). There followed the present application for an order 'directing the expungement of all court and police records relating to his arrest, trial and adjudication'. His request for relief was denied by the Family Court, the Appellate Division affirmed (40 A.D.2d 631, 335 N.Y.S.2d 995), and that court thereafter granted leave to appeal.
The basis for the application to expunge the record was 'to prevent (them) from standing as obstacles to petitioner's future progress, particularly in seeking employment after completing school'; that absent expungement of the records, he will be discriminated against in connection with future education and licensing; and, hence, it is urged that the maintenance of the records or divulging their contents violates his constitutional guarantee of due process and equal protection of the law.
Not without logic, it is argued that '(o)pportunities for schooling, employment, or professional licenses may be restricted or nonexistent as a consequence of the mere fact of an arrest, even if followed by acquittal or complete exoneration of the charges involved' (Menard v. Mitchell, 139 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 430 F.2d 486, 490) and that the claim of secrecy of juvenile proceedings, ostensibly provided by section 166 of the Family Court Act, is 'more rhetoric than reality' (In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 24, 87 S.Ct. 1428, 18 L.Ed.2d 527), since many employers, the military services and governmental agencies require information on applicants' Family Court records.
Our attention has been called to Matter of Henry v. Looney (65 Misc.2d 759, 317 N.Y.S.2d 848) wherein then-Justice Wachtler directed that the infant's name and his parents' surname be obliterated, and that the records be otherwise sealed, subject to inspection upon order of the court. In that case, the juvenile's apprehension was baseless and, because it was conceded that no offense had been committed and the entire affair was a mistake, the charges were withdrawn. The court recognized, however, that when an arrest fails to terminate with an adjudication for reasons other than complete innocence, expunction might be inappropriate.
Thus, in the posture of this case, we find no statutory or other authority for the grant of the requested relief. Such discretion as there may...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coopersmith v. Gold
...of Dorothy D., 49 N.Y.2d 212, 424 N.Y.S.2d 890, 400 N.E.2d 1342 (1980) (recognizing rule); Matter of Richard S. v. City of New York, 32 N.Y.2d 592, 596, 347 N.Y.S.2d 54, 300 N.E.2d 426 (1973) (seal confidential records); Matter of Werfel v. Fitzgerald, 23 A.D.2d 306, 311, 260 N.Y.S.2d 791 (......
-
Tony W., Matter of
...the Court of Appeals had rejected a variety of arguments offered in support of efforts to secure such orders. Matter of Richard S., 32 N.Y.2d 592, 347 N.Y.S.2d 54, 300 N.E.2d 426; Matter of Antonio P., 40 N.Y.2d 960, 390 N.Y.S.2d 919, 359 N.E.2d 42. 1 The Court nevertheless recognized the s......
-
People v. Michael M.
...Act § 166; Matter of Herald Co. v. Mariani, 67 N.Y.2d 668, 669-670, 499 N.Y.S.2d 672, 490 N.E.2d 539; Matter of Richard S. v. City of N.Y., 32 N.Y.2d 592, 347 N.Y.S.2d 54, 300 N.E.2d 426; Royal Globe Ins. Co. v. Mottola, 89 A.D.2d 907, 908, 453 N.Y.S.2d 723; but see, People v. Price, 100 Mi......
-
Application for a Search Warrant No. L-18/81, Matter of, L-18
...to seal court records in order to preserve confidentiality in sensitive proceedings." Ibid. See also Matter of Richard S. v. City of New York, 32 N.Y.2d 592, 347 N.Y.S.2d 54, 300 N.E.2d 426 (Family Court's records); Stevenson v. News Syndicate, 276 App.Div. 614, 96 N.Y.S.2d 751, aff'd. 302 ......