ILNews

Forum on state’s new expungement law scheduled for Aug. 7

IL Staff
July 30, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

To address the confusion that has been growing since the state’s new expungement law took effect, a group of state and local lawmakers from Marion County have scheduled a public forum and panel discussion to answer questions about removing old criminal offenses from individual records.

The meeting will be held from 6 to 8 p.m. Aug. 7 in rooms A and C of the Julia Carson Center, 300 E. Fall Creek Parkway, Indianapolis. Legal experts will explain what types of crimes are covered by the law and the steps to be taken to get a record cleared.  

Since Public Law 159-2013 took effect July 1, lawmakers and court staff have received numerous questions from people unsure how they can expunge their records.

The legislation was passed during the 2013 session of the Indiana General Assembly and allows individuals to have previous convictions for a number of nonviolent offenses removed from their records. The goal of the new law is to remove those crimes from public background checks used by employers so the offenses do not prevent a rehabilitated ex-offender from finding a job.

“These people have paid their debts to society many times over, and those of use who supported the expungement law on both sides of the aisle believe they deserve the opportunity to find employment and take care of their families,” Rep. Cherrish Pryor said in a press release. “They have the right for a second chance.”

Pryor, along with Reps. Robin Shackleford, Gregory W. Porter, Vanessa Summers and John Bartlett, all Democrats from Indianapolis, Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis, and Marion City-County Councilors Maggie Lewis, Vop Osili and Leroy Robinson are hosting the public forum and panel discussion.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT