Opinion
Case No. 13-mj-01654
03-04-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MICHELLE MARIE WOOD, Defendant
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's request to expunge her criminal conviction for concealing a person from arrest in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1071. ECF No. 28. No hearing is necessary. L.R. 105.6.
On October 29, 2013, Defendant pleaded guilty to concealing a person from arrest in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1071. On January 29, 2014, the Court placed Defendant on probation, which ended in October 2014. Defendant now seeks expungement of her criminal conviction because "this is [affecting] further employment with any law enforcement agency going forward," as she is "currently up for a position in law enforcement with the Federal Government that requires a Top Secret Security Clearance."
Because there is no applicable statute providing for expungement in a case such as this one, the only available jurisdictional basis is the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction. United States v. McKnight, 33 F. Supp. 3d 577, 580 (D. Md. 2014).
[F]ederal courts generally may invoke the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction in two circumstances: (1) where necessary to permit disposition by a single court of claims that are factually interdependent; and (2) "to enable a court to function
successfully, that is, to manage its proceeding, vindicate its authority, and effectuate its decrees."Id. (quoting Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 379-80 (1994)).
Here, the adjudicative facts underlying Defendant's conviction are not interdependent with the equitable considerations raised by Defendant's request for expungement. See United States v. Harris, 847 F. Supp. 2d 828, 834 (D. Md. 2012). Further, expungement of Defendant's criminal conviction runs contrary to a federal court's ability to vindicate its authority and effectuate its decrees. See id. at 834-35; United States v. Mitchell, 683 F. Supp. 2d 427, 432-33 (E.D. Va. 2010). Because the Court accordingly lacks ancillary jurisdiction, Defendant's request to expunge her criminal conviction (ECF No. 28) is DENIED. Date: March 4, 2016
/s/_________
Thomas M. DiGirolamo
United States Magistrate Judge