State v. L.M.

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 3076

Syllabus

Expungement; eligibility; abuse of discretion; de novo review; pending criminal case; outstanding warrant; third-degree felonies; fourth-degree felonies; fifth-degree felonies; R.C. 2953.32; R.C. 2953.32(D)(1)(b); R.C. 2953.32(D)(2); R.C. 2953.32(A)(1); R.C. 2913.02; R.C. 2913.31. Judgment affirmed. Because appellant had a pending larceny case and an outstanding warrant, she was statutorily ineligible for expungement pursuant to R.C. 2953.32(D)(1)(b) and (D)(2), and the trial court's denial of her motion for expungement was therefore proper. Having resolved the appeal on that basis, we decline to opine on the parties' shared view that R.C. 2953.32(A)(1) permits expungement of lower-level felonies even when third-degree felonies remain on a movant's record.