Feed on

State v. Boykin, 2013-Ohio-4582 (Ohio Oct. 22, 2013) held that neither the Ohio Constitution, Ohio Revised Code or case law require the sealing of a criminal record based on a pardon.

The Ohio Constitution also militates against Boykin’s argument that a pardon automatically entitles the recipient to have the record of the pardoned conviction sealed. Article III, Section 11 provides:

The governor shall communicate to the General Assembly, at every regular session, each case of reprieve, commutation, or pardon granted, stating the name and crime of the convict, the sentence, its date, and the date of the commutation, pardon, or reprieve, with the governor’s reasons therefor.
In other words, the Constitution contemplates that a record of the conviction and the pardon will be maintained. The governor must report the name of the offender, the offense, the sentence, and the reasons for the pardon to the General Assembly.

State v. Boykin, 2013-Ohio-4582 (Ohio Oct. 22, 2013)

Docket.  Oral Argument 4/10/13.  Oral Argument Preview. Oral Argument VideoOral Argument Video.

Leave a Reply