State v. Boddie, No. 87538.
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Ohio) |
| Writing for the Court | Christine T. McMonagle |
| Citation | 868 N.E.2d 699,170 Ohio App.3d 590,2007 Ohio 626 |
| Parties | The STATE of Ohio, Appellee, v. BODDIE, Appellant. |
| Docket Number | No. 87538. |
| Decision Date | 15 February 2007 |
v.
BODDIE, Appellant.
William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, and Diane Smilanick, Assistant Prosecutor, for appellant.
Brian Boddie, pro se.
[868 N.E.2d 700]
CHRISTINE T. McMONAGLE, Judge.
{¶ 1} In this appeal, the state of Ohio appeals from the order of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas that granted defendant-appellee Brian Boddie's application for expungement and sealed his conviction records pursuant to R.C. 2953.32. The state argues that the trial court erred in granting the application for expungement without a hearing and, further, that Boddie was not eligible for expungement because he was not a first offender. We reverse the decision and remand the cause.
{¶ 2} On December 1, 2005, the trial court entered an order granting Boddie's application for expungement and ordering that records regarding his conviction for drug abuse be sealed. The trial court did not hold a hearing prior to granting the expungement application.
{¶ 3} In its first assignment of error, the state contends that the trial court erred by granting the application without first holding a hearing.
{¶ 4} R.C. 2953.32(B) provides that "[u]pon the filing of an application under this section, the court shall set a date for a hearing and shall notify the prosecutor for the case of the hearing on the application." The requirement of a hearing is mandatory, and each application for expungement must be set for hearing. State v. Minch, Cuyahoga App. No. 87820, 2007-Ohio-158, 2007 WL 117497; State v. Poston, Cuyahoga App. No. 87216, 2006-Ohio-4125, 2006 WL 2322859; State v. Powers, Cuyahoga App. No. 84416, 2004-Ohio-7021, 2004 WL 2979951; State v. Saltzer (1984), 14 Ohio App.3d 394, 395, 14 OBR 500, 471 N.E.2d 872. Accordingly, the trial court erred in granting the application for expungement without first holding a hearing.
{¶ 5} Appellant's first assignment of error is sustained, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with R.C. 2953.32.
{¶ 6} In its second assignment of error, the state contends that the trial court erred in granting Boddie's application for expungement and ordering that records regarding his drug-abuse conviction be sealed because he has another conviction.
{¶ 7} R.C. 2953.32(A)(1) provides...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Aguirre, Nos. 2013–0870
...liberally construed." State v. Aguirre, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 12AP–415, 2013-Ohio-768, 2013 WL 816547, ¶ 12, citing State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). Second, it noted that the creditor retains the same remedies it had "for collection of ......
-
State v. Barrett, No. 97614.
...OT–05–028, 2005-Ohio-6435, 2005 WL 3293774, ¶ 7. {¶ 32} Rehabilitation has lost favor in the criminal justice system. State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). Under the rehabilitative theory of sentencing, the courts had broad discretion to order......
-
State v. S.J., No. 108126
...and forgiveness.’ " State v. M.D. , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92534, 2009-Ohio-5694 [2009 WL 3478517], ¶ 8, quoting State v. Boddie , 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). State v. M.H. , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 105589, 2018-Ohio-582, 2018 WL 898922, ¶ 10. {¶ 10} ......
-
State v. K.S., No. 107124
...punishment, atonement, and forgiveness."' State v. M.D., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92534, 2009-Ohio-5694, ¶ 8, quoting State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). {¶ 9} "'Expungement is an act of grace created by the state,' and so it is a privilege, n......
-
State v. Aguirre, Nos. 2013–0870
...liberally construed." State v. Aguirre, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 12AP–415, 2013-Ohio-768, 2013 WL 816547, ¶ 12, citing State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). Second, it noted that the creditor retains the same remedies it had "for collection of ......
-
State v. Barrett, No. 97614.
...OT–05–028, 2005-Ohio-6435, 2005 WL 3293774, ¶ 7. {¶ 32} Rehabilitation has lost favor in the criminal justice system. State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). Under the rehabilitative theory of sentencing, the courts had broad discretion to order......
-
State v. S.J., No. 108126
...and forgiveness.’ " State v. M.D. , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92534, 2009-Ohio-5694 [2009 WL 3478517], ¶ 8, quoting State v. Boddie , 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). State v. M.H. , 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 105589, 2018-Ohio-582, 2018 WL 898922, ¶ 10. {¶ 10} ......
-
State v. K.S., No. 107124
...punishment, atonement, and forgiveness."' State v. M.D., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92534, 2009-Ohio-5694, ¶ 8, quoting State v. Boddie, 170 Ohio App.3d 590, 2007-Ohio-626, 868 N.E.2d 699, ¶ 8 (8th Dist.). {¶ 9} "'Expungement is an act of grace created by the state,' and so it is a privilege, n......