Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Ex Parte Sharyn Sue Hyde
Citation: Not availableDocket: 13-17-00052-CV
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; June 21, 2018; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
The Texas Department of Public Safety appeals the trial court's decision to grant Sharyn Sue Hyde's petition for expunction of her arrest records from May 27, 2006, when she was charged with possession of a controlled substance. After initially being indicted, the charge was dismissed and re-filed as an attempt to possess a controlled substance, to which Hyde pleaded guilty, receiving eighteen months of deferred adjudication community supervision. The Department argues that the trial court misinterpreted the expunction statute, that Hyde did not provide sufficient evidence for expunction, and that the trial court failed to hold a hearing regarding the expunction. In the appeal, the Department successfully established the criteria for a restricted appeal, demonstrating it filed its notice within six months of the judgment, was a party to the case, did not participate in the hearing, and identified apparent error in the record. The court notes that judicial records are generally public, with the expunction statute serving as a limited exception aimed at erasing records of wrongful arrests. The relevant procedures are outlined in Chapter 55 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellate court ultimately agrees with the Department and reverses the trial court’s order granting expunction. Under Article 55.01, individuals arrested for felonies or misdemeanors are entitled to expunge related records if they have been released, the charge did not lead to a final conviction, is no longer pending, and there was no court-ordered community supervision, except for Class C misdemeanors. All charges from an arrest must meet these criteria for expunction eligibility. Case law emphasizes that expunction applies to the entire arrest rather than individual charges, meaning if any charge resulted in court-ordered supervision, expunction is denied. In the case of Hyde, despite a dismissed possession charge, she pled guilty to attempted possession and underwent community supervision, disqualifying her from expunction. Consequently, the trial court's order was reversed, denying Hyde's petition for expunction. The judgment also clarified that the ruling affects all law enforcement agencies named in the expunction order, regardless of their participation in the appeal, as established in Ex parte Elliot.