Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Administrative Law Blogs -> Within the Scope

Administrative Law

: Within the Scope

How Broad an Inquiry Do We Need for Court-Ordered Expungements?

By Eric L. Lipman

In an interesting opinion handed down by the Minnesota Supreme Court last Thursday, the Court divided over the question of how broad the inquiry over the expungement of records held by other agencies needed to be.

All six of the justices who participated in the decision agreed that the appellant, S.L.H., was not entitled to a court order directing the expungement of certain records that are now held by state, county and city criminal justice agencies. These justices likewise agreed that the Court?s earlier precedent instructed that the state courts should only direct the expungement of records that are held outside of the courts ?under appropriate circumstances.? Where the court was equally divided was over the breadth of the analysis of such ?appropriate circumstances.?

Justices Lorie Gildea, G. Barry Anderson and Christopher Dietzen announced an appropriateness analysis that began with ?due consideration? of whether a particular handing of the documents at issue was required by ?equally important executive and legislative functions.? As Justice Gildea summarized: ?We have ? recognized what is, in essence, a presumption in favor of the other branches of government when there is a possible separation of powers conflict between the branches.?

Disagreeing that such a presumption was warranted, Justices Paul H. Anderson, Helen Meyer and Alan Page concurred only in the result. This second plurality of judges announced that the expungement of records held in other branches was warranted ?when such relief is essential to the existence, dignity, and function of a court? ? presumably an analysis that was limited to an assessment of only one branch?s role.

Both set of analyses are accessible here.

Full post as published by Within the Scope on September 12, 2008 (boomark / email).