ILNews

New law allows for restricted record access for certain crimes

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A change in state law that starts Friday allows non-violent offenders to have their criminal records sealed for misdemeanor and Class D felonies. An Indianapolis man is already filing a petition asking the Marion Superior Court to limit access to records involving two money conversion convictions.

This past session, the General Assembly passed House Enrolled Act 121, referred to as the new “second-chance” law. This allows individuals convicted of certain offenses that weren’t violent or sex crimes to request restricted access to arrest and criminal records after eight years since they completed a sentence. The new law’s limited to misdemeanors and Class D felonies, and it only limits access rather than expunging a person’s record completely.

HEA 1211 also allows people to request that limited record access if he or she was not prosecuted, if the charges were dismissed, if acquitted, or if the conviction was later vacated.

If a court grants the request, an individual would not be required to disclose the conviction on employment applications or any other documents outside of the criminal justice system.

The legislation’s co-sponsor, Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis, a civil attorney with Gonzalez Saggio & Harlan, held a press conference about the new statute outside the City-County Building in Indianapolis where resident Quinn Minor joined him before filing his petition. Minor received two "low-value" convictions in 1997 and 1999, and since completing his home detention and probation sentences, he has had trouble trying to find employment as a result of those being listed on his record.

“I’ve owned my own business, gone back to school, and raised a family with my wife of 13 years,” Minor said. “I paid my dues for these crimes, and I think my family deserves the opportunity to move forward without my old mistakes limiting our future.”

The Indiana State Police is responsible for the general aspect of limiting access to criminal histories, and about two dozen requests had been filed during the past three years through November 2010. A legislative fiscal analysis earlier this year said it wasn’t clear how many people this new law could effect.

A spokeswoman for the Indiana Senate Democrats said they have contaced the Indiana Supreme Court in hopes of having a form created for pro se petitioners.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Dupree file
    I have a class D felony on my record. I was not convicted,but because it shows on my record I can't find a job or enroll in school.

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. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  2. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  3. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  4. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT