Florida Juvenile Record Sealing
Florida juvenile record sealing is an important tool since enhancements can be based on past convictions. A prior juvenile record may be used to show an escalating pattern of criminal activity, see Taylor v. State, 659 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). It is often asserted the content of the Pre-sentence Investigation ("PSI") makes findings that there was an escalating pattern of violence in past conduct to warrant an increase in sentence. But a sealed record will not appear. The PSI will sometimes reflect a juvenile robbery charge are equivalent to adult convictions. In Williams v. State, 691 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the Fourth District determined that a departure sentence based on an escalating pattern of criminal conduct must be "rooted in convictions or juvenile dispositions." Id. at 1159. The Fourth District went on to hold that, "Hence, mere ‘contacts' with the juvenile system will not support a finding of an escalating pattern of criminal conduct." Id.
A PSI will often impose the guidelines departure sentence to enhance a sentence to allege that a "simple robbery" charge did not result in a disposition which was the equivalent of an adult conviction which is contrary to law. Puffinberger v. State, 581 So. 2d 897, 898 (Fla. 1991); see also Burke v. State, 483 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1985). Rather, it's disposition was entitled "non-judicial," which is neither a delinquency adjudication nor a withhold of delinquency adjudication, and fails to demonstrate any finding of guilt. Williams v. State, supra at 1159; Taylor v. State, supra. Additionally, where there was no juvenile disposition then it may be deemed as "held open" with no definitive result or disposition at all. Last, a prior charge which fails to reflect any final disposition cannot be used as a basis to aggravate a sentence. Williams v. State, supra; see also Abouraad v. State, 677 So. 2d 1319, 1321 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
Likewise, in California, Welfare & Institutions Code § 827 (b) guarantees the confidentiality of Juvenile Court records. The strong state interest in the confidentiality of juvenile proceedings and records has long been recognized. In re Keisha T., 38 Cal App.4th 220, 231, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 822 (1995). Probably every state in the Union has similar provisions. See Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 311, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974) (quoting Alaska's provisions); Federal Rule of Evidence 609(d).
The purpose of preserving the confidentiality of juvenile records can be served by permitting inspection by a third party only after an initial in camera inspection by the Juvenile Court. Navajo Express v. Superior Court, 186 Cal.App.3d 981, 985 (1986).
A PSI will often impose the guidelines departure sentence to enhance a sentence to allege that a "simple robbery" charge did not result in a disposition which was the equivalent of an adult conviction which is contrary to law. Puffinberger v. State, 581 So. 2d 897, 898 (Fla. 1991); see also Burke v. State, 483 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1985). Rather, it's disposition was entitled "non-judicial," which is neither a delinquency adjudication nor a withhold of delinquency adjudication, and fails to demonstrate any finding of guilt. Williams v. State, supra at 1159; Taylor v. State, supra. Additionally, where there was no juvenile disposition then it may be deemed as "held open" with no definitive result or disposition at all. Last, a prior charge which fails to reflect any final disposition cannot be used as a basis to aggravate a sentence. Williams v. State, supra; see also Abouraad v. State, 677 So. 2d 1319, 1321 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).
Likewise, in California, Welfare & Institutions Code § 827 (b) guarantees the confidentiality of Juvenile Court records. The strong state interest in the confidentiality of juvenile proceedings and records has long been recognized. In re Keisha T., 38 Cal App.4th 220, 231, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 822 (1995). Probably every state in the Union has similar provisions. See Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 311, 94 S.Ct. 1105, 39 L.Ed.2d 347 (1974) (quoting Alaska's provisions); Federal Rule of Evidence 609(d).
The purpose of preserving the confidentiality of juvenile records can be served by permitting inspection by a third party only after an initial in camera inspection by the Juvenile Court. Navajo Express v. Superior Court, 186 Cal.App.3d 981, 985 (1986).
Source...