STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
EVAN PLOTKA, APPELLEE
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.
A trial court cannot order expungement of a criminal history record without the defendant first obtaining a certificate of eligibility from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
The defendant moved to expunge his criminal record without obtaining a certificate of eligibility. The trial court granted the motion, finding the sta…
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 Expunction Of Criminal History Records cases and more on FLexlaw
ANTOON, Judge.
The state appeals the trial court’s order expunging the defendant’s criminal history record. We must reverse because the defendant faded to file a certificate of eligibility from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement as required by section 943.0585(2), Florida Statutes (1995).
Section 943.0585 provides that the courts of this state “shad not order a criminal justice agency to expunge a criminal history record untd the person seeking to expunge a criminal history has applied for and received a certificate of eligibility for expunction.” However, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.692, which pertains to petitions to seal or expunge criminal records, does not include this requirement.
Here, the defendant moved to expunge his criminal record but faded to obtain a certificate of eligibility from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Overruling the state’s objection, the trial court concluded that, to the extent rule 8.692 is inconsistent with section 943.0585, the rule is controlling. In so ruling, the trial court concluded that the statutory condition precedent of the certificate of eligibility was procedural and, therefore, violated the supreme court’s rule-making authority.
Since the trial court’s ruling, our supreme court has issued its opinion in State v. D.H.W., 686 So. 2d 1381 (Fla.1996), which holds that section 943.0595 does not violate the separation of powers provision of Article II, section 3, of the Florida Constitution. Accordingly, a petition to expunge a criminal history record may not be granted until the conditions precedent in section 943.0585 have been satisfied.
REVERSED.
PETERSON, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Harvill, 860 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…d that Harvill secured a prior sealing or expunction of a criminal history record in Louisiana. The existence of a valid certifí-cate of eligibility is a condition precedent to the court’s consideration of an expungement petition. State v. Plotka, 689 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We conclude that the trial court erred when it failed to consider that because FDLE revoked the required certificate of eligibility, Harvill had not complied with the required conditions precedent. If Harvill believes that FDLE…
-
R.J.L. v. State, 887 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 2004)…d. Based • upon the reasoning expressed in D.H.W., we likewise hold that the Legislature can constitutionally require that a certificate of eligibility be issued prior to the expungement of nonjudicial criminal history records. See State v. Plotka, 689 So. 2d 1174, 1175 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (extending our holding in D.H.W. to cases involving petitions to expunge nonjudicial ‘criminal history records). In the instant case, R.J.L. was denied a certificate of eligibility because his record reflects that he has be…