Felony Conviction Later Deemed a Misdemeanor Remains a Felony Conviction for Purposes of Expungement.

State v. S.A.M., Minn.Ct.App., 3/21/2016.  S.A.M. pled guilty to a burglary.  The trial court stayed imposition of sentence.  Time goes by. The trial court discharged S.A.M. from probation, declaring that the conviction was deemed to be a misdemeanor.  S.A.M. moved to expunge the conviction.  Everybody who could object to the expungement did so.  The trial court denied the request.

The expungement statute says that someone who "was convicted of or received a stayed sentence for a misdemeanor" may seek expungement. Minn.Stat. 609A.02, subd. 3(a)(3).  (There is a lengthy list of felonies which can be expunged but none applied to S.A.M.)  Minn.Stat. 609.13, subd. 1(2) says:

Notwithstanding a conviction is for a felony . . . the conviction is deemed to be for a misdemeanor if the imposition of the prison sentence is stayed, the defendant is placed on probation, and the defendant is thereafter discharged without a prison sentence.

The court of appeals concludes that the language of the expungement statute is free of ambiguity. While the words do seem straight forward enough, none of those words says anything about the impact (if any) of 609.13.  Also, none of those words say anything about just when to apply those words.  Deciding to apply the words to the (now voided) felony conviction is nothing more than a policy choice.  The court could just as reasonably chosen to apply the expungement statute to the status of the conviction at the time the application was made.  When S.A.M. asked for the expungement, which was after the court had discharged him from probation, he could state correctly (except to the Guidelines Commission) that he had been convicted of a misdemeanor.  That's 609.13.  At the time of his expungement request he was thus someone who "was convicted of or received a stayed sentence for a misdemeanor".  

The court of appeals points to two lines of cases to support its conclusion.  State v. Moon, 463 N.W.2d 517 (Minn. 1990) is first up. There the supreme court said that even though Moon's felony conviction was deemed to be a  misdemeanor under 609.13, the legislature had determined, nonetheless, that he could not possess a firearm.  The court discerned a legislative concern for public safety that meant that certain persons were precluded from possessing firearms notwithstanding 609.13. In another case, Matter of Woollett, 540 N.W.2d 829 (Minn. 1995), the court upheld the authority of the Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training to ignore 609.13 in establishing qualifications for officer licensing. The second line of cases looks at the impact of 609..13 on the career offender statute.  State v. Franklin, 861 N.W.2d 67 (Minn. 2011).  Among other things a trial court must determine whether an offender "has five or more prior felony convictions."  Franklin said that the point in time to make that determination is when the career offender is before the court for sentencing.  A prior felony conviction since deemed a misdemeanor thus doesn't count.  Seems like S.A.M., only less dangerous.