On December 10, 2024 the House Criminal Justice Standing Committee heard testimony on a House Bill 5957, which would remove overbroad and unnecessary restrictions on when an old criminal record can be sealed to better implement the policy goals of the Clean Slate law. Safe & Just Michigan Executive Director John S. Cooper and Clean Slate Program Manager Kamau Sandiford provided written testimony and stated:

“The court petition expungement process was created in the 1960s, but the “intervening conviction disqualification rule” (“the Rule”) was not added until the 2021 Clean Slate package. My recollection is that the proposed automatic process had such a requirement and it was added to the petition process to align the two. However, experience has shown this was a mistake:

1. Judicial Discretion. Judges always had the discretion to consider a subsequent conviction when ruling on the petition. So adding the Rule removed judges’ discretion to grant the petition in spite of the new conviction, but not the other way around. This is directly contrary to the remedial purpose of the expungement law.

2. Harsh in Application. The effect of the Rule has been to block the original conviction from being sealed, regardless of how minor the new one is and regardless of the harshness of doing so. Because most new convictions are low-level misdemeanors, the rule is usually harsh in application and routinely allows low-level misdemeanors to prevent more serious old convictions from being sealed. This is inconsistent with the purpose of the expungement law and undermines the remedial purpose of expungement.

3. Led to Inconsistent Judicial Rulings: Difficulties in applying the Rule have led to inconsistent judicial decisions, with some courts adopting a more rigid interpretation of the law leading to permanent ineligibility. Other courts have been more flexible in their interpretation and have allowed a “restart of the clock/wait period” from the most recent intervening conviction. Eliminating the Rule will eliminate this inconsistency and lead to more predictable outcomes that align with the policy goals of the statute.

For all of these reasons, SJM urges the Legislature to pass HB 5957 and correct expungement law going forward.”

Download>> SJM Testimony Supporting House Bill 5957