Opinion
Case No. 2:89-cr-231.
March 27, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's motion to expunge her criminal record. (Doc. # 1). Defendant argues that, since her conviction, she has turned her life around and regrets the poor judgment that led to her conviction. The Government opposes Defendant's motion for expungement.
This Court notes that "`[i]t is within the inherent equitable powers of a federal court to order the expungement of a record in an appropriate case.'" United States v. Wiley, 89 F. Supp.2d 909, 910 (S.D. Ohio 1999) (quoting United States v. Doe, 556 F. 2d 391, 393 (6th Cir. 1977)). However, "`the expungement power is narrow and appropriately used only in extreme circumstances.'"Wiley, 89 F. Supp.2d at 910 (quoting United States v. Robinson, No. 94-1945, 1996 WL 107129, *1 (6th Cir. March 8, 1996)). This Court has specifically recognized that applications for expungement of valid convictions have been uniformly denied.Wiley, 89 F. Supp.2d at 910 (citations omitted).
While Defendant's conduct following her conviction is certainly commendable, Defendant has not identified any "extreme circumstances" that would justify the expungement of her criminal record. Moreover, although the Court is genuinely sympathetic to Defendant's situation, the Court has difficulty concluding that Defendant's hardship outweighs the government's long-recognized interest in maintaining complete criminal records. See Wiley, 89 F. Supp.2d at 912. Therefore, under these circumstances, Defendant's motion to expunge her criminal record (Doc. # 1) is DENIED.
Defendant states that, since her conviction, she: has held employment with Children's Hospital, has been involved with inner-city youth, authored several books, founded the Always Be Charming program, is a co-pastor of Walk of Faith Church, and has sought continuing education through Capital University.
IT IS SO ORDERED.