Today, Judge Zmuda had a criminal arraignment docket full of individuals charged with varying offenses, from robbery, to domestic violence, to possession of illegal drugs. It took about an hour, and I learned how arraignments work in some more detail than what I had learned at the Toledo Municipal Court. Note that although the docket is called a "criminal arraignment docket," it does not necessarily mean that there are only arraignments. The only difference here regarding the arraignments was that the indictments against the defendant were felony charges, compared to municipal court indictments, which were traffic violations and misdemeanor charges (for more information about the difference between a municipal court and a court of common pleas, see blog post "1-9-2015: Criminal Defense").
If a defendant doesn't have a lawyer at the time of his arraignment, the judge will ask him if one should be appointed, if he is able to hire one, or if he would like to represent himself. Depending on the type of response given, the judge will then grant time for a defendant to hire a lawyer or the judge will appoint a lawyer for the defendant. Either way, the judge will then reschedule the arraignment for another date.
When the arraignment is ready to proceed, the defendants will be asked how they plead. A defendant may plead guilty, no contest, not guilty, or not guilty by reason of insanity (for more information about how a defendant pleads during an arraignment, see blog post "1-9-2015: Criminal Defense"). At this time, the defendant may also request a pretrial hearing.
The court also heard cases of probation and community control violations. The defendants and their lawyers asked for another chance, arguing the defendant should have one by demonstrating that the defendant had been in good behavior along with other applicable evidence in attempt to show to the judge why the defendant deserves one.
There was a strange case of a defendant who had rejected a plea agreement, but changed his mind an hour later and stated to the judge that he would like to accept. Throughout the hearing, the judge was very clear in explaining to the defendant that by accepting the plea agreement, he would waive his right to a trial and appeal. He tried make sure that the defendant understood the terms and other pertinent information about the plea agreement before accepting his request. It remains unclear what prompted the defendant to change his mind about the plea agreement.
Finally, there was an interesting request from a defendant for his criminal record to be sealed for an offense that had happened sixteen years ago. He convincingly explained that sealing his record would permit better work opportunities for him. He also stated that the offense took place when, as the judge completed his thought, when he "was a different man." The defendant had changed a lot since the offense, with no new offenses. The judge said this is the perfect reason why defendants can ask to seal records. He granted his motion.
I enjoyed watching today's arraignment docket more than watching arraignments at the Toledo Municipal Court because I could better understand what was happening in the courtroom. This is because all of the parties were speaking loudly and clearly for others to hear. In addition, I have a copy of the entire criminal arraignment docket for this courtroom, and the proceedings don't seem to be as rushed as those in the Toledo Municipal Court. Because of this, I was able to keep up and learn more about what happens during proceedings like these. I now understand arraignments better than I did before.
As I understand it, criminal records cannot be expunged in felony cases. Are you saying that they can be sealed? If so, what is the difference between sealing and criminal record and expunging it? How do you feel about someone having the ability to seal (conseal?) his record? Should an employer who has a lot at stake have a right to know whether or not a person he is about to hire is a convicted felon? What do you think?
ReplyDeleteExpunging a record is the same thing as sealing a record. According to The Ohio Ex-Offender Reentry Coalition, both misdemeanors and felonies can be expunged, although some specific misdemeanors and felonies cannot.
DeleteRegarding the ability to seal one's record, in this case, I don't think that it was unreasonable for the court not to grant the defendant's request to seal his record. I checked the defendant's record online (it still hasn't been sealed) because although his docket indicates he had an amount of heroin in his possession, there was no indictment found.
Employers should have a right to know criminal records of whom they hire, unless if the courts deem that a defendant is worthy of a clean slate and seals the record. Expungement means that the court has granted it because the facts surrounding the record meet a very narrow set of requirements.