Understanding the Standards of Review for an Expungement Appeal

December 21, 2021 by JACK MKHITARIAN

Standards of review for an expungement appeal.In New Mexico, you will almost certainly take a criminal record if:

  • The police arrest y'all for a crime;
  • The prosecutor charges you lot with a criminal offence;
  • Yous plead guilty to a law-breaking; or
  • A court convicts y'all of a offense.

A criminal record can follow yous around like an aroused ghost and might forestall you from getting a job, a banking company loan, or even an apartment. These negative consequences tin bear on you even if yous were never bedevilled—merely simply arrested and charged with a crime.

What Is an Expungement?

An expungement allows you to petition the courtroom to wipe your slate make clean. If the court grants it, for virtually purposes, you can muffle whatever record the court expunged. You can and so go on with your life as if the incident never happened.

In New Mexico, you must utilize to a court for an expungement. The judge enjoys a considerable degree of discretion concerning whether to grant your expungement petition. Nonetheless, if the district court judge denies your petition, you can appeal the deprival.

The Differences Between District Courts and Appeals Courts

District courts and appeals courts perform different functions. Commune courts and magistrate courts are courts of general jurisdiction for felony and misdemeanor criminal cases and trials in New Mexico. Appeals courts take jurisdiction to hear appeals from the lower courts. They make their rulings based on documents provided to them by the lower courts, including transcripts of the lower court proceedings.

What Is a "Standard of Review"?

Appeals courts are typically reluctant to grant appeals out of respect for decisions fabricated by the district court judges. A cavalier mental attitude towards overturning the rulings of lower courts has the potential to destabilize the entire judicial arrangement.

Consequently, appeals courts deny most of the appeals that dissatisfied parties file with them. A "standard of review" describes how much deference a higher court should grant rulings of a lower court.

Dissimilar Types of Standards of Review (as Applied to Expungement Appeals)

Unlike standards of review utilise, depending on what grounds the defendant bases their appeal.

Issues of Fact

An consequence of fact is the kind of event that an eyewitness might be able to resolve. For example, if the court is trying to determine whether the petitioner violated their probation by leaving the country, eyewitness testimony may resolve this issue. Since appeals courts do not hear the testimony of witnesses, they are very reluctant to overturn district courtroom rulings based on issues of fact. When a ruling rests on an event of fact, 2 standards of review exist that might overturn the lower court's determination:

  • "Lack of substantial show" to support the district court's ruling: Unfortunately for the political party who appeals, but about any show will be enough to back up the district court'southward ruling.
  • "Clearly erroneous": This standard might utilize to overturn a lower courtroom decision if, for example, it was based on the decision that the accused performed an act that was physically impossible or highly improbable (e.g., shooting someone between the eyes from two,000 yards abroad).

An appeals court will overturn a lower court'south ruling if information technology either lacked substantial evidence or if it was clearly erroneous. Neither one happens very often.

Problems of Law

Appellate courts can review issues of law, which are questions about how the police should apply in a given situation. Here are a couple of examples to give yous an idea:

  • Did the New Mexico state legislature intend for the expungement statute to allow the expungement of the detail crime that the defendant was convicted of?
  • Was the criminal statute under which the defendant was originally bedevilled an unconstitutional police?

The standard of review for an appeals court with respect to an consequence of police is called "de novo." This is a Latin phrase that means "from the new." This means that the appeals courtroom decides the event without referencing the trial court's decision. They basically await at the fact as if for the first time and make their independent determination.

Mixed Problems of Fact and Police force

In many cases, it is hard to tease apart factual and legal issues or to make up one's mind whether the consequence at stake is a dispute over a fact or a dispute over the interpretation of a police force. One type of issue that typically includes both factual and legal concerns is the lower judge's discretion on whether the petitioner has been sufficiently reformed to warrant the expungement of a criminal conviction.

In nigh cases of mixed fact and law, an appeals court will either:

  • Interruption down the outcome into sub-problems of fact and law, and resolve each one separately using the applicative standards of review outlined above; or
  • Make up one's mind, looking at the issue equally a whole, whether factual or legal sub-issues predominate, and resolve the unabridged outcome based on the appropriate standard of review.

Mixed issues of fact and constabulary are perhaps the almost difficult of all "standard of review" problems.

Procedural Errors

An expungement petitioner might entreatment the denial of an expungement petition based on an exclamation that the lower court gauge committed a procedural error—such as dismissing a petition for declining to come across an overly strict deadline for submitting certain evidence. In this case, the appeals court volition apply ane of 2 standards:

  • Abuse of discretion, or
  • Plain fault.

The differences between these two standards of review are technical. Just the appeals court tin can overturn the commune court'south ruling if they find that the trial courtroom judge abused their discretion or made a plain mistake. All the same, much like disputes of fact, appeals courts rarely overturn district court rulings on these bases.

Remands

Instead of but overturning a district courtroom'due south ruling, an appeals courtroom might "remand" the case back to the district courtroom. To remand a instance is to send information technology back to the lower court with instructions to correct an error identified by the higher court and so resolve the case accordingly. The appeals court might, for case, order a remand after clarifying the meaning of a statute that the lower court misinterpreted.

Act Decisively Before Time Runs Out!

The attorneys at New Mexico Criminal Law Offices are aggressive, knowledgeable, and relentless. We take represented many defendants before the New Mexico criminal justice organization, and we know how to best handle expungement appeals for our clients. Remember一clearing your proper noun is our first priority.

Contact the lawyers at New Mexico Criminal Law Offices by calling 505-200-2982 or by contacting usa online for a costless consultation.