Case Name: Joshua HOWARD a/k/a Joshua L. Howard, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee
Court: Mississippi Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Mississippi
Decision Date: 2017-04-11
Citations: 231 So. 3d 198
Docket Number: NO. 2015-CA-01496-COA
Parties: Joshua HOWARD a/k/a Joshua L. Howard, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee
Judges: BEFORE LEE, P.J., ISHEE AND GREENLEE, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 231
Pages: 198–201

Head Matter:
Joshua HOWARD a/k/a Joshua L. Howard, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee
NO. 2015-CA-01496-COA
Court of Appeals of Mississippi.
04/11/2017
Rehearing Denied August 22, 2017
Certiorari Denied November 9, 2017
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CYNTHIA ANN STEWART
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: BY: SCOTT STUART JASON L. DAVIS
BEFORE LEE, P.J., ISHEE AND GREENLEE, JJ.

Opinion:
GREENLEE, J.,
FOR THE COURT:
¶ 1. Joshua Howard appeals from the Rankin County Circuit. Court's denial of his motion for an expungement following his gubernatorial pardon. Pursuant to the controlling precedent of Polk v. State, 150 So.3d 967 (Miss. 2014), we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW
¶2. In 2009, Howard pleaded guilty, to statutory rape and was sentenced to a term of twenty years, with seventeen years suspended. On January 10, 2014, the Governor of the State of Mississippi granted a full, complete,*' and unconditional pardon for Howard's conviction. On June 25, 2014, Howard filed a motion in the Circuit Court of Rankin County asking that all records be expunged relating to the conviction for which he received the pardon. The court denied his motion, and Howard appeals.
DISCUSSION
¶3. The issue in this appeal is whether the judiciary is required to order an expungement after a gubernatorial pardon is issued pursuant to Article 5, Section 124 of the Constitution of the State of Mississippi. In a five to four decision, the Mississippi Supreme Court held in Polk, 150 So.3d at 968 (¶ 5), that pardoned individuals are not entitled to an expungement under current Mississippi law.
¶4. The Polk majority held that the expungement of criminal records that have been kept pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 45-21-1 (Rev. 2015) is "an act of legislative grace," and that neither' our State nor our Federal Constitution provides a right to an ex-pungement. Polk, 150 So.3d at 968 (¶ 6). The court stated that "an unconditional pardon solely removes all legal punishment for the offense and prevents any future legal disability based on that offense. It does not edit history." Id. at 970 (¶ 13). Ultimately, the court held: "There being no statutory basis for expungement of the record of the criminal conviction for which [the appellant] was pardoned, 'the trial court correctly denied [the appellant's] petition to expunge the record(s) pertaining to his criminal conviction." Id. at (¶ 14).
¶ 5. The minority opinion in Polk proffered that a criminal record itself is a punishment, and that to fully effectuate the function of a pardon, the record should be expunged. Polk, 150 So.3d at 973 (¶ 23) (Kitchens, J., dissenting in part). See United States v. Padelford, 76 U.S. (9 Wall.) 531, 542, 19 L.Ed. 788 (1869) (superseded in part by statute) ("In the case of Garland, this court held the effect of a pardon to be such .'that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence.'") (quoting Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333, 380, 18 L.Ed. 366 (1866). Given the broad scope of a pardon, the minority would have found that Mississippi's general expungement statute entitles those pardoned to an ex-pungement. Polk, 150 So.3d at 973 (¶ 24) (Kitchens, J., dissenting in part); Miss. Code Ann. § 99-15-26(5) (Rev. 2015) ("Upon petition therefor, the court shall expunge the record of any case in which an arrest was made, the person arrested was released, and the case was dismissed or the charges were dropped or there was no disposition of such case."),
¶ 6. The majority holding in Polk has been reaffirmed in. Jones v. State, 158 So.3d 1144, 1146 (¶ 6) (Miss. 2015), and Robertson v. State, 158 So.3d 280, 281 (¶ 1) (Miss. 2015). Polk is fully applicable to Howard's circumstances, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.
CONCLUSION
¶ 7. The trial court did not err in denying Howard's motion for an expungement. Under current Mississippi law, an individual is not entitled to an expungement following receipt of a gubernatorial pardon. Howard's argument on appeal is therefore without merit.
¶ 8. THE JUDGMENT OP THE RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., BARNES, ISHEE, CARLTON, FAIR AND WILSON, JJ., CONCUR. WESTBROOKS, J., SPECIALLY CONCURS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION, JOINED BY . IRVING, P.J.
, See also Hentz v. State, 152 So.3d 1139, 1140 (¶ 1) (Miss 2014) (With only eight justices participating, the supreme court affirmed the trial court's denial of an expungement on a four-four vote.).