Opinion ID: 1561186
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Merits of the Petition

Text: In his petition to the circuit court seeking to have his record expunged, McCardle sought relief under § 41-9-646, Ala.Code 1975. Together, §§ 41-9-645 and -646 establish specific circumstances in which a circuit court may order that inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information be purged from a criminal record. Section 41-9-645 provides, in relevant part: If an individual believes ... information [in his criminal record [3] ] to be inaccurate or incomplete, he may request the original agency having custody or control of the detail records to purge, modify or supplement them and to so notify the [Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center] of such changes. Section 41-9-645 then provides for an appeal to the circuit court for a de novo hearing if the individual is unsatisfied with the agency's response to the request. Section 41-9-646 provides: Should the record in question be found to be inaccurate, incomplete or misleading, the court shall order it to be appropriately purged, modified or supplemented by an explanatory notation. This Court has construed the term purge as used in § 41-9-645 to mean something less than complete expungement.... The term `purge' means: `to make free of something unwanted.' Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 1010 (11th ed.2003). Mobile Press Register, Inc. v. Lackey, 938 So.2d 398, 403 (Ala. 2006). This Court has explained: Thus, if there is erroneous information in the record, the record may be purged of that information; if the record misstates the offense, it may be modified; or, if the record is incomplete, it may be supplemented. However, all of this is directed at making the record accurate, not making it disappear. State v. Blane, 985 So.2d at 387. In Blane, Milton Blane pleaded guilty to third-degree theft of property and fulfilled the terms of his sentence. 985 So.2d at 385. He later moved to have his criminal record expunged, arguing that the record [was] `misleading' and that it [had] had a detrimental effect on his ability to run his business. 985 So.2d at 385. Blane based his argument on the premise that his actions did not constitute theft of property; they were, he argued, more properly characterized as fraud. Blane contended that at the time he entered his guilty plea, he did not understand the full import of the plea. The trial court entered an order expunging Blane's record, and the State filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. 985 So.2d at 386. This Court examined §§ 41-9-645 and -646 and determined that the trial court in Blane had exceeded its discretion, stating: [I]t appears undisputed that the records at issue accurately reflect that Blane pleaded guilty to the offense of third-degree theft of property, that he was convicted of that offense, and that he received a suspended sentence and was ordered to pay costs, fees, and restitution. 985 So.2d at 387. This Court reasoned: Although he now argues that he was not guilty of that crime, Blane does not argue that his conviction violated any of the constitutional protections afforded an accused. Instead, he contends that he followed what may have been unwise legal advice and that he did not understand the full ramifications of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor offense. These facts do not render the record of conviction inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading. 985 So.2d at 387. This Court concluded: Blane has been convicted of a crime, and his record of conviction is not inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading; therefore, § 41-9-646, Ala.Code 1975, does not authorize the circuit court to purge, modify, supplement, or expunge that record. 985 So.2d at 387-88. Based on Blane and on §§ 41-9-645 and -646, Ala.Code 1975, the City contends that the circuit court exceeded its discretion in ordering that McCardle's criminal record be purged, deleted and dissolved from the records of the municipal court records to include any electronic and computer generated records of said charge. We agree. As was the case with Blane, McCardle has been convicted of a crime, and his record of conviction is not inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading. Blane, 985 So.2d at 387. The criminal record at issue accurately reflects that McCardle pleaded guilty to the offense of carrying a pistol without a permit. That offense denotes a violation of § 13A-11-73, and the written charge against McCardle accurately states the charged violation of § 13A-11-73. Section 13A-11-73 provides that [n]o person shall carry a pistol in any vehicle ... without a license therefor.... (Emphasis added.) McCardle admitted to carrying a pistol in his vehicle without a license to do so. Accordingly, McCardle's criminal record accurately reflects the circumstances of his conviction; it is not inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading within the meaning of §§ 41-9-645 and -646. McCardle argued to the circuit court that the charge is misleading in that it communicates that he was carrying the pistol on his person. He has abandoned this argument in his answer to the City's petition. [4] We note, however, that McCardle was charged with carrying a pistol without a permit. That phrase, and thus the charge, is consistent with § 13A-11-73, which embraces carrying a pistol in a vehicle, and is not misleading. Any concerns that in common parlance the word carrying connotes possessing on the person rather than transporting in a vehicle should be addressed to the legislature. Furthermore, even if the circuit court was satisfied that, under the facts of this case, the terminology used by the legislature in defining the offense was misleading in that it suggested that McCardle carried the weapon on his person and not merely in a vehicle, as McCardle contended in the circuit court, the circuit court did not have authority to order the complete removal and deletion of the record of McCardle's conviction. In Blane, this Court declined to read the word `expunge' [meaning to treat the record as if it had never existed] into § 6-5-646. 985 So.2d at 387. As this Court explained, the efforts authorized by the statute are directed at making the record accurate, not making it disappear. Id. Accordingly, the circuit court had no authority to order the complete purge, dissolution, and deletion of McCardle's criminal record.