Greenwich Time

Clean slate laws need deft touch

- Gary White is a Stamford state Superior Court judge.

In the United States nearly one-third of the adult population has a criminal record. Many of these people are part of the 6.7 million Americans who are now or once were incarcerat­ed or subject to some form of community supervisio­n such as probation or parole.

Apart from the punishment a convicted criminal gets for the offense, he often suffers a number of collateral consequenc­es as well. For example, the odds of someone with a criminal record being hired after a job interview are reduced by 50 percent, and if he was recently released from jail, he will likely remain unemployed for at least a year. People with rap sheets also have difficulty qualifying for public housing or finding a private landlord who will rent to them. Furthermor­e, many of these individual­s cannot legally drive; are prohibited from possessing firearms; are disqualifi­ed from holding a variety of occupation­al licenses; or are prevented from serving on a jury or casting a ballot. These and other impediment­s may affect an ex-offender for long after his criminal sentence is completed.

Many states across the country, however, are adopting “clean slate” legislatio­n to help people convicted of “minor” crimes get relief from the terrible collateral consequenc­es of their past wrongdoing. These statutes expunge certain misdemeano­r and low-level felony conviction­s following a specified period of time after the ex-offender completes his sentence. The expungment occurs either automatica­lly or after the person files a written petition that is either approved or denied by a judge or a board of pardons and parole.

Criminal justice advocates say that in places where these laws exist, such as Pennsylvan­ia and Michigan, criminal recidivism has decreased and employment has increased among people who qualify for expungemen­t. Everyone wins, according to clean slate supporters, when ex-offenders have their history of petty criminalit­y scrubbed because it becomes easier for them to find good jobs, decent housing, strengthen their families, and regain their dignity.

The opponents complain, however, that expungemen­t weakens the rule of law and excuses behavior that is often atrocious. They note that drunken driving, drug dealing, sexual misconduct, and even homicide are sometimes treated as misdemeano­rs or low-level felonies, but are probably not the kind of offenses that should be permanentl­y blotted from public awareness. They also assert that in the age of the internet, expungemen­t is a “feel good” measure that can never truly eliminate online informatio­n about an ex-offender’s criminal past. Lastly, the detractors argue that clean slate laws ignore the legitimate interests of victims in ensuring offender accountabi­lity and finality of results.

There is no doubt that clean slate statutes embody an admirable attempt to help deserving ex-offenders get beyond their past and rejoin the community as productive citizens. Even so, expungemen­t laws may impede the public’s right to know vital informatio­n about ex-offenders and diminish the valid consequenc­es of criminal behavior. Wherever are enacted, they must be carefully written in a way that not only helps ex-offenders rebuild their lives, but simultaneo­usly minimizes any potential risk to public safety.

 ??  ?? Gary White
Gary White

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States