State of Minnesota, City of Crystal, Appellant, vs. S. P., Respondent.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2012). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A13-0614 State of Minnesota, City of Crystal, Appellant, vs. S. P., Respondent. Filed November 25, 2013 Reversed Bjorkman, Judge Hennepin County District Court File No. 27-CR-06-080402 Peter A. MacMillan, MacMillan, Wallace, Athanases & Patera, P.A., Minneapolis, Minnesota (for appellant) S.P., Minneapolis, Minnesota (pro se respondent) Considered and decided by Stauber, Presiding Judge; Bjorkman, Judge; and Minge, Judge.ï ª ï ª Retired judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10. UNPUBLISHED OPINION BJORKMAN, Judge Appellant City of Crystal challenges the district court s order expunging respondent s criminal records held by the executive branch, arguing that the court exceeded its inherent authority. We reverse. FACTS Respondent S.P. was convicted of misdemeanor theft in August 2008. On September 14, 2012, S.P. petitioned the district court for expungement of all records of that conviction held by the judicial and executive branches. The city objected to the petition and filed a written argument opposing expungement. After a hearing, the district court found that the benefits to S.P. in seeking employment are commensurate with the disadvantages to the public from elimination of the records and the burden on the court in issuing and enforcing an expungement order. The district court ordered expungement of judicial branch and executive branch records of S.P. s conviction. This appeal follows. DECISION Minnesota courts have inherent judicial authority to expunge criminal records. State v. Ambaye, 616 N.W.2d 256, 257 (Minn. 2000). Whether the district court exceeded the scope of this authority is a question of law, which we review de novo. State v. M.D.T., 831 N.W.2d 276, 279 (Minn. 2013). After the district court issued its order, the supreme court released its opinion in M.D.T., which clarified the limits of inherent judicial authority to expunge records held by the executive branch. The supreme court stated that the authority the judiciary has to 2 control its own records does not give the judiciary inherent authority to reach into the executive branch to control what the executive branch does with records held in that branch, even when those records were created in the judiciary. Id. at 282. The judicial branch does not have the inherent authority to order expungement of executive-branch records because it is not necessary to the performance of a judicial function. Id. at 283. Under M.D.T., the expungement of S.P. s criminal records held in the executive branch is not necessary to the performance of a judicial function. Accordingly, we reverse the district court s order to the extent that it applies to records held by the executive branch. Reversed. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
