STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
JARED MARTIN HERSTIK, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that an adjudication of guilt for one charge precludes expungement under section 943.058(2)(b), but the court may reconsider expungement under section 943.058(3) if unusual circumstances exist.
[1] A court may order the sealing or expunction of criminal history records if the subject of the record has not been adjudicated guilty of any charges stemming from the arre…
[2] A trial court has discretion to expunge criminal history records upon a finding of unusual circumstances, notwithstanding statutory requirements that the subject not be a…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent was arrested for possession of Methaqualone and DUI. The possession charge was nol-prossed after he completed a pretrial intervention progr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unusual Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State of Florida seeks review by petition for writ of common law certiorari of an order granting respondent’s motion to expunge and seal court records.
Respondent Jared Martin Herstik was arrested by the Hollywood Police Department for possession of Methaqualone and for driving under the influence. The State entered a nol-pros of the possession of methaqualone charge after respondent successfully completed a pretrial intervention program. In the meantime the court had adjudicated respondent guilty of driving under the influence. Respondent made a motion to expunge and seal the court records pursuant to section 943.058, Florida Statutes (1983), and the court granted his motion.
Section 943.058 provides:
(2) The courts of this state shall continue to have jurisdiction over their own procedures, including the keeping, sealing, expunction, or correction of judicial records containing criminal history information. The courts may order the sealing or expunction of any other criminal history record provided:
(b) The person who is the subject of the record has not been adjudicated guilty of any of the charges stemming from the arrest or alleged criminal activity to which the records expunction petition pertains;
Respondent’s adjudication of guilt for driving under the influence precluded him from meeting the requirements set forth in section 943.058(2)(b). The court’s order granting expungement constituted a departure from the essential requirements of law and accordingly, the order is quashed. See State v. Sobie, 343 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
However, it appears from the transcript that the trial court intended to expunge pursuant to section 943.058(3), Florida Statutes (1983), which gives the court discretion to expunge upon a finding of unusual circumstances notwithstanding subsection (2) of section 943.058. Therefore we grant this writ without prejudice to the trial court to reconsider this matter, upon proper motion.
CERTIORARI GRANTED.
LETTS, DELL and BARKETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Russell v. Miami Herald Publ'g Co., 570 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…had been adjudged guilty of those offenses. See State v, Urf, 524 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We recognize that our interpretation of the statute in Urf, which we reaffirm today, conflicts with the fourth district’s opinion in State v. Herstik, 475 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). The next inquiry is the appropriate standard that a court should apply when considering a motion to vacate an order sealing or expunging the court’s own records. This is where we believe the judge in this case erred. He ruled t…
-
State v. Pena, 593 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…ormation; that any limiting language contained in the statute relates to ordering the sealing or expunging of such records in the custody of other departments or agencies of government. At the outset we concede that this court, in State v. Herstik, 475 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), aligned itself with the state’s position, holding that the sealing of a court record containing criminal history information was a departure from the essential requirements of law because it violates subsection (2)(b) of the sta…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- State v. Sobie, 343 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)