More getting a clean slate, News and Observer (06.26.2011
In recent years, more and more North Carolinians have had their criminal records erased, clearing blemishes they worry will cost them jobs in a tight market.
Since 2000, the number of these breaks, called “expungements,” granted each year has nearly tripled, state records show. Over the last 10 years, more than 76,000 people once charged with a crime have been given a clean slate.
Their records are now top secret, locked away in a protected database accessible by only a handful of top court officials.
Earlier this month, legislators opened the door for more people to qualify for an expungement, passing a law that enables those convicted of nonviolent felonies at age 16 or 17 to apply. Gov. Bev Perdue signed the bill late last week.
Judicial officials say the tightening job market is driving people who wouldn’t otherwise fret about a criminal charge to take action. As more and more companies check criminal records to screen applicants, job seekers are finding themselves limited by the underage drinking charge collected as a freshman at a N.C. State football tailgate or the shoplifting charge from 1982.
And since criminal record checks are now as easy as getting on the Internet, keeping these indiscretions private is nearly impossible.
“When jobs are scarce and firms are flooded with applications, they are looking foreasy ways to screen people out,” said John Quinterno, a labor expert with South by North Strategies in Chapel Hill. “Criminal record? Boom, you’re out.”
Currently, those whose charges are dismissed or who are acquitted by a jury are automatically eligible for an expungement; they only need to fill out a simple application at the Clerk of Court’s office. Offenders under 18 convicted of a misdemeanor or those up to 20 convicted of certain alcohol-related offenses are also eligible. Those with prior felony convictions or expungements are not eligible .
Once granted, expungements are treated with utmost secrecy.
The file vanishes from the clerk’s office. Police and prison officials are ordered to keep quiet about any case later expunged. Defendants whose records are erased are granted immunity to perjury if they deny the existence of a criminal charge that’s been erased. Private companies that sell criminal records face civil penalties if they disclose information about an expunged record.
The Administrative Office of the Courts, which maintains a database with details about expunged cases, offers scant information about trends, save the number granted each year.
A News & Observer analysis of the state criminal database, however, shows dramatic differences in numbers of expungements and types of charges wiped clean in certain counties across the state.
It also shows that the standard illustration of the college student charged with a minor alcohol or drug offense is only a portion of those benefiting from expungements. Sometimes, for example, those accused of sexual assault who are acquitted or whose charges are dismissed also get the records erased.
Wake leads the way
Between 2007 and 2009, Wake County granted ex pungements to more defendants who were charged in those years than any other county in the state and three times the number approved in Mecklenburg, the state’s largest county, according to an N&O analysis of state records.
In those years, Wake judges granted expungements to 4,530 defendants charged in the same time frame. The popularity of the maneuver continues to grow. Over five weeks this spring, about 375 Wake defendants applied.
In Wake County, 57 percent of those granted expungements between 2007 and 2009 were under 21 at the time of arrest. The top charge expunged: misdemeanor larceny. In Mecklenburg County, the leading expunged charge was driving while impaired.
The large number of ex pungements in Wake County is due primarily to robust programs in which prosecutors dismiss charges if a first-time offender admits guilt and enrolls in, for example, a program on the dangers of drinking and driving or an anger management class.
Mecklenburg County has such deferral programs, too, and handles about as many participants. But in Wake County, prosecutors routinely talk to defendants about the perk of expungements. So do administrators of the deferral programs. The clerk’s office distributes user’s guides for how to apply.
“We’re a little more user-friendly in Wake County,” said Colon Willoughby, Wake County’s longtime district attorney. “The whole idea here is to find ways, despite evidence of guilt, to find social or humanitarian reasons to help this person and not prosecute the case.”
Youthful mistakes
Heather Farmer, a 22-year-old from Stantonsburg, had been cramming for a test at NCSU’s library late into the night in March 2010. Exhausted and stressed, Farmer and a friend then sat in Farmer’s car and smoked pot.
An officer pulled Farmer over on the way home; she was charged with possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, both misdemeanors.
An assistant Wake County prosecutor offered her a deal: Go to a drug and alcohol program for first offenders and the charge will be dismissed. That would make Farmer automatically eligible for an expungement.
“It was a one-time opportunity and a much needed wake-up call,” said Farmer, a psychology major.
Farmer attended several classes in which a therapist talked to her and other young defendants about the hazards of drugs and alcohol and bad decisions.
When she applied for an expungement last month, Farmer already had a small taste of the discrimination she would face with a criminal charge on her record. A camp at which she’d been a counselor for years said she could no longer work there last year because of the drug charge.
“I was so embarrassed,” Farmer said. “That’s not who I am.”
Mark Prouse of Zebulon has also been burdened by a charge on his record, even though it was dismissed.
Prouse, 29, was charged with aiding and abetting the impersonation of a law enforcement officer. At the time, Prouse worked at a towing company; an unhappy customer reported to police that he and a co-worker had posed as sheriff’s deputies. When the complainants didn’t show up in court to testify, the prosecutor dismissed his charge.
Prouse has been unable to secure work in the public safety field ever since. He wants to be a Raleigh police officer and has also applied for volunteer jobs at community fire departments.
“Even when I get the chance to explain, it doesn’t seem to make a difference,” said Prouse, who applied for an expungement this spring.
Judges have no discretion in granting expungements.
Teenagers are entitled in cases of certain misdemeanor convictions; judges are also required to grant an expungement to most defendants whose charges are dismissed, who are acquitted by juries or who are otherwise exonerated.
More cases to come
This year, lawmakers voted to allow more young offenders to get expungements. In these applications, though, the judge will have a say on whether to grant them. As many as 10,280 defendants in the state convicted between 2006 and 2010 would be eligible, according to a N&O analysis of the criminal database.
Legislators were driven, in part, by an ongoing debate about the age in which young people should be considered adults in criminal court. North Carolina is one of only two states that considers 16- and 17-year-olds to be adults when charged with a crime.
Sen. Doug Berger, a Democrat from Youngsville, pressed for years to expand the ex pungement law to young offenders.
“At this age, their reasoning is not sound,” said Berger, a former prosecutor. “If they had been treated like a child in court, like they are in other states, they could start anew. But, in North Carolina, we’ve let this past mistake follow them around for the rest of their lives.”
Erica Guerrero, a 20-year-old NCSU student, is determined to not let her indiscretion follow her further.
Guerrero was charged with violating a domestic violence protective order in March 2010 when she texted her boyfriend after he took out a protective order against her the day after an explosive fight.
She was embarrassed to go to court and hates talking about it. She cannot imagine ever having speak with an employer about the incident; she applied for an expungement last month.
“It’s dirty laundry that I want to go away,” Guerrero said. “It was a dumb decision with a dumb boy.”
News researchers Brooke Cain and Peggy Neal contributed to this report.
mandy.locke@newsobserver.com or 919-829-8927