|
By Alexandria Staubach
Earlier this month the Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld the Wisconsin Department of Justice’s denial of Scot Van Oudenhoven’s handgun purchase application based on an previous misdemeanor domestic violence conviction that had been expunged under Wisconsin law. The decision reinforces the narrow effect of expungement on criminal convictions in Wisconsin, where they are difficult to obtain and of limited effect. Expungement seals a criminal court file but has no impact on the conviction itself. Judge Gregory B Gill Jr. wrote for District III appeals court. He was joined in the opinion by Judges Lisa K. Stark and Judge Thomas M. Hruz. Van Oudenhoven was convicted of battery as an act of domestic violence in a 1994 Calumet County case. In 2019, a Calumet County Circuit Court judge granted Van Oudenhoven’s petition for expungement. In 2022, Van Oudenhoven attempted to purchase a handgun in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) denied the purchase based on his misdemeanor battery conviction. After Van Oudenhoven exhausted administrative remedies with the DOJ, he sought judicial review in Winnebago County Circuit Court. Judge Teresa S. Basiliere affirmed the DOJ denial. Federal law prohibits the sale of firearms to individuals who have been convicted of offenses related to domestic violence, but among the exceptions are misdemeanor cases. Possession is permitted where the misdemeanor conviction has been “expunged or set aside.” On appeal, Van Oudenhoven argued that expungement under Wisconsin law has the same force and effect as “expunged or set aside,” which phrase is not explicitly defined under federal law. Van Oudenhoven argued that the U.S. Supreme Court provided a common understanding of the phrase when it said in Logan v. United States that “expungement,” “set-aside,” “pardoned,” and “civil rights restored,” “describe[] a measure by which the government relieves an offender of some or all of the consequences of his [or her] conviction.” Because Van Oudenhoven’s expungement removed “some” consequences of his conviction, the Calumet County court “expunged or set aside” his conviction, he argued. The Court of Appeals rejected Van Oudenhoven’s argument that his conviction had been “expunged or set aside.” “The terms expunged, set aside, pardoned, and restoration of civil rights all, by definition, require state action that removes the prohibition on an individual from possessing or receiving a firearm under federal law,” wrote Gill. “The state procedure in question must completely remove all effects of the conviction at issue,” he said. Wisconsin’s expungement law does not remove the effects of conviction; “the statue merely removes evidence of the conviction from court files,” said Gill. Current state law permits expungement for an offense with a penalty of six years or less, as long as the offense was not a violent felony, the person was under 25 years old and had no prior felony record, and the person requested expungement at the time of sentencing. If all conditions are met, a subsequent court may grant a request for expungement after the person has successfully completed their sentence. During the last decade, several bills have been introduced to reform Wisconsin’s expungement and pardon laws. Last session, one bill seemed poised for success. Senate Bill 38/Assembly Bill 37 received broad support, with organizations on both sides of the aisle registering in favor, from the conservative group Americans for Prosperity to the ACLU. The bill also had a bipartisan group of 63 co-sponsors. Although the bill successfully made its way through the Assembly, it ultimately failed to get a vote from the Senate. “Expungement is an issue that has been before the Legislature and the Supreme Court for several years, yet, despite extensive study and discussion, there have been few changes made,” wrote the State Bar of Wisconsin in support of the bill. “Without expungement, every sentence is a life sentence,” it said. Some legislators remain undeterred. Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) told WJI “It has unfortunately been a long, difficult road for the expungement reform bill. However, every session brings in new legislators and a fresh chance for us to get on the same page and recognize the importance of getting this done.” “Too many people in our state have trouble finding work or housing because of low-level crimes they committed many, many years ago when they were quite young. I’m hopeful we can properly strike a balance between public safety and rightfully giving people a second chance to build a life and a career for themselves,” McGuire told WJI. According to a 2018 Wisconsin Policy Forum report, an estimated 1.4 million individuals in Wisconsin have criminal records that may hinder their ability to find employment. In Milwaukee County, 30,638 cases closed between 2006 and 2017 technically meet the current restrictive eligibility criteria but have not been expunged, said the report. In 2020, the Court of Appeals held that even minor, technical violations of community supervision rules will bar expungement.
0 Comments
By Margo Kirchner Several organizations and activists this morning called on Wisconsin legislators and the governor to return 17-year-olds to the juvenile justice system and ensure that no 10-year-olds are eligible for the adult criminal justice system. The call came at a press conference outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse organized by Rev. Joseph Ellwanger on behalf of the Milwaukee Inner-city Congregations Allied for Hope (MICAH) Transformational Justice Task Force. Ellwanger was surrounded by more than two dozen supporters of youth justice reform, including two representatives from Wisconsin Justice Initiative. Ellwanger noted that the press conference was motivated by upcoming hearings in the case of a young boy who killed his mother when he was 10 years old. Under Wisconsin law, anyone charged with first degree intentional homicide, even a 10-year-old, is charged as an adult. (WJI guest columnist Roy Rogers previously wrote about the case here.) Hearings for a "reverse waiver" to juvenile court are set for next week in the young boy's case. Several speakers at the press conference referenced research indicating that the human brain does not fully develop until around age 25. Joshua Rovner of The Sentencing Project flew in from Washington, D.C. for the press conference. He noted that Wisconsin is one of only four states that treat all 17-year-olds as adults in the criminal justice system. (Wisconsin is aligned with Georgia, Texas, and Louisiana on that point.) Similarly, Wisconsin is one of just three states that allows a child as young as 10 years old to be charged as an adult for certain crimes, he said. Regarding the pending case, Rovner emphasized that “this is an elementary school child we are talking about.” Wisconsin’s Legislature and governor need “to fix these laws,” Rovner said. Emily Coddington, associate director of the Wisconsin Association of Family and Children’s Agencies, read a statement on behalf of the Raise the Age Coalition, a group of more than two dozen nonprofit and advocacy organizations pushing for legislation returning 17-year-olds to the juvenile justice system. “Wisconsin has failed to acknowledge what 46 other states already know: that raising the age (of adult prosecution) lowers recidivism rates, responds to often neglected mental health concerns and cognitive development research, provides a restorative and rehabilitative lens to youth justice, and begins to address racial disparities in the criminal justice system,” Coddington said. “We know that youth incarcerated with adults are 34% more likely to commit future crimes than youth served in settings designed to meet their unique needs, yet we continue to charge all 17-year-olds as adults,” she said. Wendy Volz Daniels, a clinical social worker and chair of the Felmers Chaney Advocacy Board, discussed how adults held by the Department of Corrections do not receive important anger management and cognitive behavior treatment until shortly before release. Several thousand individuals are on waiting lists for substance abuse and cognitive behavior treatment. “Sending children to the adult criminal justice system ensures that they will not get the treatment and rehabilitation that is needed,” she said. “Children cannot wait,” Daniels said. “Their needs are better served in the juvenile justice system, where they will immediately receive therapy and treatment,” she said. Two system-impacted individuals, including James Price, spoke about their own experiences as youth in the adult system and how children do not belong there. Price said that he “was absolutely scared” when he was age 14 in adult court in the building he now stood before, and he had to make adult decisions as a 14-year-old. Another system-impacted man said that when he was a teen and waived into adult court he “lost anything that looked like help,” including a social worker and psychiatrist who had been helping with his anger management. The Department of Corrections (DOC) called him “an overweight kid with PTSD” when he entered the corrections system, yet he did not receive necessary treatment for 27 years, shortly before his release. Other speakers included Sylvester Jackson, chair of the MICAH Transformational Justice Task Force; Dr. Kweku Ramel Smith, a psychologist and social justice advocate; and Dr. Richard Shaw, pastor of St. Matthew C.M.E. Church and MICAH president. Jackson emphasized that the DOC is “not prepared to deal with mental health and trauma” and “we should not forget that that’s a child,” referring to the pending case. He argued that society should not accept the charging of a 10-year-old as an adult Smith discussed how the education system has different levels of ages because of the vulnerabilities caused by mismatching age with setting, and the lack of such age differentiation in the adult corrections system. Shaw noted that God shows compassion and mercy, yet under current law “we have little to no compassion and mercy on children.” “We are challenging our government, we are challenging legislators, to change this law,” he said.  Wendy Volz Daniels speaks on June 18, 2024. Photograph courtesy of ACLU-Wisconsin. Ben Austen, author of Correction: Parole, Prison and the Possibility of Change, came up from Chicago to talk about not just the problems of America's criminal justice system but why and how we change it. He discussed his research regarding parole hearings, the continued reliance on the facts of past crimes rather than changes in the people who committed them, the difference one or two people in positions of power can make, the different trajectories of corrections systems between America and Scandinavian countries and the absence of a social safety net in America, and some changes to be made from viewing prison facilities as warehouses to places of rehabilitation. Attendees experienced a lively cocktail hour, conversation, Ben's thoughtful and thought-provoking presentation, and the thoughts of others in response to Ben's talk. If you missed the event, or just want to watch Ben's presentation again, here it is! WJI thanks the following sponsors for their support of the event: Platinum
The Colby Abbot and Railway Exchange are historic office buildings in downtown Milwaukee. For information on renting space in these buildings, contact [email protected]. Gold
Silver
Bronze
 By Alexandria Staubach
On April 4, the Dane County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved doubling the daily wage rate paid to in-custody workers at the county jail. Incarcerated persons at the jail previously earned a wage of $3 per day for their work. Resolution 382 lifts the wage to $6 per day. The county said in the resolution that the prior rate was "insufficient” and that it would seek additional means to improve wages and combat poverty upon reentry for incarcerated persons, calling the wage raise an “interim step.” The Dane County resolution recognizes that most correctional facilities in the United States do not pay the $6 a day the county now will, and that Dane County seeks to “be an example for other communities on this issue.” Dane County has been spending about $24,000 per year on wages to incarcerated persons. The doubled annual cost is unlikely to impact the sheriff’s budget, according to a consensus of the county’s Personnel & Finance Committee. The resolution does not provide for more jobs at the jail. In November, several Democratic legislators introduced a package of 17 bills to improve conditions at correctional facilities throughout the state. The package included Assembly Bill 816/Senate Bill 862 to raise the minimum wage for incarcerated people in jails and prisons to a minimum of $2.33 per hour, which is the rate for tipped workers. The bills, introduced in December 2023, did not progress before the Legislature adjourned last month. The Dane County resolution was sponsored by Dana Pellebon, Kierstin Huelsemann, Michele Ritt, Sarah Smith, Heidi Wegleitner, and April Kigeya. By Alexandria Staubach Last week a bipartisan group of more than 30 lawmakers introduced a bill to end sentences of life without the possibility of parole for juveniles. The bill, Senate Bill 801, also creates new mitigating factors for a sentencing court to consider, recognizing that juveniles change and mature mentally and emotionally over time. The bill would apply retroactively to anyone currently serving a juvenile life-without-parole (JLWOP) sentence. If enacted, SB 801 would bring Wisconsin in line with 28 states already banning JLWOP sentences, including three of Wisconsin’s closest neighbors: Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois. The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety. Ruling in Graham v. Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court held it unconstitutional for a court to impose JLWOP on non-homicide juvenile offenders; the court found that such a sentence violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In Miller v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court banned mandatory life sentences for juveniles no matter the severity of the crime. SB 801 states that its purpose is to clarify that “the statutory mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or extended supervision for repeat offenders does not apply to youthful offenders,” consistent with Miller. JLWOP sentences are unique to the United States; we are the only country in the world with such a practice. According to the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth, the practice is permitted in 22 states, including Wisconsin and Michigan. In five states the practice remains on the books without active sentences. Michigan has the highest JLWOP population in the nation and recently made national headlines for sentencing 17-year-old Ethan Crumbly, who committed Michigan’s deadliest school shooting at age 15, to life without the possibility of parole. However, Wisconsin outpaces Michigan regarding overall number of youth incarcerated on life sentences with or without parole (141 compared to 65) and sentences over 40 years (73 compared to 15) as well as the total number of children in adult prisons (1,709 compared to 554), according to a 2021 report produced by the nonprofit Human Rights for Kids. The following table shows the bill's sponsors.  Note: Wisconsin is one of just three states (Georgia and Texas are the others) in which 17-year-olds are automatically treated as adults for purposes of criminal charges. The other 47 states process charges against 17-year-olds within the juvenile justice system. Wisconsin Justice Initiative has joined the Raise the Age Coalition, advocating for legislation to return Wisconsin's 17-year-olds to juvenile court. By Roy Rogers Guest Columnist Outside of the brain development research that counsels against treating 17-year-olds as adults, placing them in an adult setting is unhealthy and borders on benign cruelty. For these 17-year-olds, and those even younger, treating them like adults and keeping them in the adult system, together with more sophisticated adult criminals in the facilities, could, can, and has led to increased criminality in the institutional settings. At times they are forced to partake in activities that are harmful for them, due to the strong pressure from mob mentality and older incarcerated people. You increase the likelihood of assaults and trauma and aggravate mental health issues, which a lot of young people are dealing with when they enter into the correctional system. People sometimes have the misconception that the young person will have access to more treatment resources in the adult facilities, but that is not the case. More than likely, 17-year-olds going into the adult system have lengthy sentences. With long incarceration times, the likelihood of getting them involved in any treatment programs is thin. The institution will consider them too early in their sentence structure for programming treatment. In modern correctional wisdom, programming and treatment are provided to those who are about to return to the community within the next year or two, five years at the most. Accountability and treatment in a setting conducive to healing and restoration are what 17-year-olds need — not to be placed in a problem-plagued adult system that is not getting better anytime soon. I knew a few 17-year-olds who were treated as adults after having been waived into adult court. There were some commonalities in their incarcerated experience:
These scenarios become even more glaring if a youth is a part of the LGBTQ community. In the hypersexual prison settings, trauma for these youth will come from both ends — staff and fellow incarcerated people, some out of ignorance and some out of intention. Why put any 17-year-old through that? We know adolescents make bad decisions; that’s no secret. And yes, sometimes those bad decisions have great consequences in our community and accountability is a must. However, accountability is also about having the opportunity to make amends. Placing a 17-year-old in the adult system actually closes the door on the meaningful opportunity to make amends. The adult system is not set up for that in any shape or form. If the youth is kept within the juvenile system, programming and a wide variety of treatment options are available. A package of community service, community counseling, community accountability, and community engagement can all be put in place for the eventual restoration of these youth back into the community. I, too, was once a 17-year-old in the adult system. So I bear witness and have first-hand knowledge of everything I speak of. In the field of macroeconomics, we talk a lot about marginal analysis in which we compare marginal benefits against marginal costs in our economic decisions. So from my economic perspective, when the marginal costs outweigh the marginal benefits, it is a bad decision. The marginal costs of placing 17-year-olds in the adult system outweigh whatever marginal benefits policymakers think will occur. Such a decision can cost children their lives. It can cost them through the inability to recover from the traumas of being a child in an adult prison. Plus, the potential for them to be trapped in the cycle of incarceration increases dramatically. The humanitarian cost outweighs any economic benefit one may gain by treating these 17-year-olds like adults. Treating these juveniles as adults is a bad decision.  Roy Rogers is a Wisconsin Justice Initiative board member. He is a data solutions processor at Quad Data Solutions and a preentry and reentry liaison and information analyst for the nonprofit organization The Community. He also is a public speaker and advocate with the Wisconsin Alliance for Youth Justice.
Rogers committed himself to juvenile justice issues while serving 28 years as a juvenile lifer in the Wisconsin prison system. Now, after release, he counsels and mentors at-risk youth. He is committed to the philosophy of restorative justice, criminal justice reform, and second-chance opportunities for juveniles waived into adult court and sentenced as adults. By Margo Kirchner Advocates converged on the Capitol in Madison on Thursday to lobby for an end to life-without-parole sentences for juveniles and a parole opportunity for all juvenile offenders currently sentenced to life or extreme terms of years. Organized by the Wisconsin Alliance for Youth Justice (WAYJ), the lobby day consisted of a panel discussion in the morning and meetings with legislators and legislative staff members during the afternoon. Contemplated legislation would allow someone sentenced to life or a life-equivalent term of years at age 17 or younger to petition for parole after 15 to 20 years, depending on the crime of conviction. The proposed legislation would not release anyone automatically. It would create an opportunity for parole consideration. The petition would go back to the sentencing court for consideration rather than to the parole commission. Supporters discussed the need to provide hope for incarcerated juvenile lifers and motivation for them to make necessary changes in their lives and behavior during custody. Preston Shipp, senior policy counsel at the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth (CFSY), moderated the panel addressing why Wisconsin should end life-without-parole sentences for juveniles. Shipp noted that 28 states plus the District of Columbia have abolished life-without-parole sentences for youth. Illinois, Minnesota, and New Mexico passed their bans just this year; Texas did so 10 years ago. Shipp noted that the recidivism rate for juvenile lifers released on parole is just 1%.  L to R: Mary Rezin, Craig Sussek, Donnell Drinks, Ellie Reid, and Roy Rogers Wisconsin Justice Initiative board member Roy Rogers was one of five panelists. Rogers was sentenced to life and entered adult prison at age 16. Based on eligibility set by his sentencing judge, Rogers became eligible for parole after 26 years. He was granted parole in 2021, after about 28 years in custody. Rogers discussed how his life turned around soon after he entered prison when he joined the “Reach Out” program at Columbia Correctional Institution. He says that the Reach Out redemption group and Jesus Christ saved him. Through the group he began advising other youth on how to avoid the mistakes he made and how to avoid prison. Today, Rogers is a data solutions processor for a marketing experience company as well as a pre-entry and re-entry liaison for The Community, a nonprofit helping to prepare and assist those released from prison in adjusting to life outside. He is also a church musician. He continues to counsel and mentor at-risk youth. Craig Sussek, another panelist, discussed his entry into the Wisconsin prison system as a teenager and his view of himself then as a worthless person with nothing to lose. That outlook led to prison behavior issues. Sussek’s turnaround began when the woman he shot visited the prison to meet him. She told him that he had been a kid who made a bad decision and that she forgave him. She said she believed his life had value that he was worthy. Sussek was released on parole a few years ago. He obtained a job quickly after his release and recently married. He noted how he is on his “third life”: life before prison, life in prison, and life now. Panelist Mary Rezin, whose mother and brother were murdered by two teens in 1999, discussed her advocacy on behalf of the younger teen, who was 16 at the time of the crime. Rezin initially viewed him as a “monster,” but after 16 years of mourning, anger, and depression she contacted a restorative justice program at the University of Wisconsin Law School to see if she could meet with him. The program prepared the two separately for about a year and then facilitated a meeting. Rezin found that he was a changed person, far from the person she remembered or imagined. He had been on drugs and alcohol at the time of the crime and was misled by an 18-year-old as to where they were going and what would happen there. Rezin now advocates for his release. She said she now views him as someone who made bad mistakes as a teenager, as many people do. She believes he has been rehabilitated and that 24 years is enough punishment. Ellie Reid, whose father was murdered by her then-16-year-old brother, discussed the complicated existence of being a victim of a heinous crime as well as a family member of the juvenile lifer who committed it. She discussed how the question needs to be “who has this person become?” Her brother, still in prison, became a welder and trains therapy dogs. Donnell Drinks, leadership development and engagement coordinator for CFSY, rounded out the panel. Drinks, from Pennsylvania, was sentenced to death, which was later reduced to life. He was 17 at the time and spent 27 years in prison before his release, following rehabilitation in prison. He discussed how juveniles in prison can mature into people who can help society, who come out with a purpose and who can help children today avoid bad decisions. Shipp opined that imposing life-without-parole sentences on children places all the blame on the children while taking blame off of society for failing those children. When Shipp asked Rogers and Sussek what they need from the community today, they noted the need for mental health understanding and emotional support. Rogers pointed to his desire for people to ask more than surface questions about his wellbeing. He is trying to do that for those who are getting out of prison. Sussek noted how he and others who have been released from prison “go through things we don’t tell you about.” Following the talk and a lunch break, organizers walked panelists and about 40 attendees through messaging, handouts, and tips for their lobbying efforts. Messaging and handouts included information regarding the end of life-without-parole sentences in other states and the nationwide movement toward treating convicted children differently than adults. Organizers also announced that over the lunch hour Sen. Jesse James (R-Altoona) and Rep. Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville) agreed to sponsor the proposed legislation. Panelists and attendees then spent two hours meeting with legislators and legislative staff in offices at the Capitol. Some system-impacted attendees, visiting the Capitol for the first time, marveled at the building and expressed how they never imagined they would be there. Executive director Margo Kirchner joined Rogers for the WAYJ lobby day on behalf of WJI. In a series of cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has accepted science regarding adolescent brain development and the differences between children and adults regarding impulse control and culpability. The court has pared down the use of life without parole for juveniles and discussed constitutional protections that limit sentencing a child a child to die in custody. For those under age 18, the supreme court has banned the death penalty, life-without-parole sentences for non-homicide crimes, and mandatory life-without-parole sentences.
Photographs by Margo Kirchner and Roy Rogers
By Gretchen Schuldt
A rare mix of Democrats, Republicans, law enforcement, and the state Public Defenders Office came together this month to support a bill that would prohibit minors from being charged with prostitution. Thirty-one people in favor of the bill appeared at a public hearing and another 10 registered in support. No one appeared or registered in opposition. The measure, Assembly Bill 48/Senate Bill 55, would bring the state in line with federal law, which recognizes children engaged in commercial sex acts as victims, not criminals, State Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee) said. It also would align with laws in Illinois, Minnesota, and Michigan, she said. "My hope is that it will make it easier for law enforcement and child welfare authorities to convince these children that they have done nothing wrong and are in no way responsible for the horrific acts they were forced into by their traffickers," she said. "Sexually exploited children exist in my district and in your district," State Rep. Jill Billings (D-La Crosse) told the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety. "The trafficking of children is happening in urban areas, rural areas, and has been reported in all 72 Wisconsin counties." State Sen. Jesse James (R-Altoona) said the average age a girl enters the sex trade is 12 to 14 years old. For boys, he said, it is 11 to 13 years old. "At times, there is a disconnect between the language we use and how we treat victims in the legal system," the state Public Defender's Office said in testimony. "A person under 18 years of age in the State of Wisconsin is presumed to be unable to give consent to engage in a sex act. In most circumstances a person under the age of 18 may not legally enter into a contract. Both are required under the legal definition of prostitution. More importantly, children engaging in sex acts for money are forced or coerced by the traffickers to engage in these acts. Treating children as delinquents/criminals only furthers the process of victimization." "This bill would prevent the prosecution or adjudication of individuals under the age of 18 for acts of prostitution, recognizing that they are often coerced, manipulated, or forced into these situations," said Donelle Hauser, president and CEO of Lad Lake. The organization said it has been working with underage victims of trafficking for more than 10 years. "By reframing the approach to address the underlying victimization rather than perpetuating a cycle of punishment, we can help these young individuals escape the exploitative environment and provide them with the necessary tools and support to rebuild their lives." "Child victims of sex trafficking are indeed victims — these are minors who cannot consent to sex and have been exploited and deserve to be protected," said Nila Grahl, Manager of Children's Wisconsin's Racine & Kenosha Child Advocacy Centers in written testimony. "Youth victims of sex trafficking need supportive health care, services and support — not fear of being charged with a crime. Unfortunately, sometimes the juvenile justice system is the only place youth are engaging with formal systems." "Treating sex-trafficked children as delinquents or criminals is self-defeating and harmful," the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault said in testimony. "The current approach increases distrust of law enforcement and child protective services, which hinders efforts to prosecute those responsible for child sex trafficking. Most importantly, the isolation of detention and the stigma of being treated as a delinquent serve only to exacerbate individuals’ feelings of guilt and shame, ultimately re-traumatizing child victims." The bill is pending in committees in the Assembly and Senate. By Alexandria Staubach
In theory, Wisconsin law currently permits expungement of certain felony and misdemeanor convictions. In practice, expungement is rare and difficult to obtain. Senate Bill 38/Assembly Bill 37 could change that. Iterations of the bill were introduced, but failed, in past legislative sessions. However, SB 38/AB 37 has broad, bipartisan support. (WJI discussed details of the bill in a previous post here.) “We are hopeful we can reach an agreement soon, pass the bill through the Senate, onto the Assembly and Governor's desk,” said Rep. Evan Goyke (D-Milwaukee), an advocate for expungement and a co-sponsor of the bill. “What we’ve been able to do with expungement is cultivate and continue to work with a broad and bipartisan coalition that doesn’t traditionally work together. My hope is that this can be an example of what can move criminal justice reform forward in Wisconsin.” A criminal conviction has implications far beyond the conviction itself. Collateral consequences include licensing exclusions that prohibit whole categories of employment, limits on voting, inability to access educational loans, and limits on public benefits. Expungement of a criminal record results in a conviction being sealed from public records. Bill sponsor Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton) stated in testimony to the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee that expungement allows “people who have served their time . . . to fully contribute to their communities, without the discrimination of having an, albeit minor, case open to public record.” Current law is highly restrictive, and the practical effect is that very few people qualify, says Natalie Lewandowski, clinical director of the Milwaukee Justice Center’s Expungement/Pardon Mobile Legal Clinic. The current law permits expungement for an offense with a maximum penalty of six years, as long as the offense is not a violent felony, the person was under 25 years old and had no prior felony record, and the person requested expungement at the time of sentencing. A later court may then grant a request for expungement after the person has successfully completed their sentence. In 2020, the Court of Appeals held that even minor, technical violations of community supervision rules will bar expungement. In its Spring 2023 session, the Expungement/Pardon Mobile Legal Clinic assessed 60 convictions for expungement. Of those convictions, only four were found eligible for expungement, and zero were successfully expunged. Two of the four requests were denied due to probation revocations, one person ultimately failed to meet the age requirement, and one person owed a balance on court costs and fines. To date in its Summer session, the clinic has assessed 16 convictions and found only three qualified for expungement. Only one of the three was found eligible at a hearing, but expungement was nevertheless denied because of an earlier probation revocation. The pending bill eliminates the under-25 age requirement — the most exciting and expansive component, says Lewandowski. She is optimistic that SB 38/AB 37 will significantly expand access and result in more successful outcomes for clients. The clinic estimates that roughly 87% of individuals who previously obtained pardons through the clinic would now be eligible for expungement if the legislation is adopted. The bill also eliminates the requirement that the person must have asked for expungement at the time of sentencing. A sentencing court would retain its ability to grant or deny expungement, but the person could petition for expungement after successfully completing their sentence even if the matter was not addressed. Under the bill, if a petition for expungement is denied, the person could file again after two years and payment of $100. Only one expungement per person would be permitted, and a person could petition just twice per crime. The new SB 38/AB 37 specifies additional offenses that are ineligible for expungement, including traffic crimes, criminal trespass, criminal damage to a business, and violation of restraining orders in domestic abuse cases. The bill would apply the changes retroactively to convictions that occurred before adoption. A 2020 Cato Institute study of data from Michigan found that petition-based expungement policies resulted in only 6.5% of eligible individuals receiving expungements in the first five years of eligibility, people who receive expungements tended to have very low rates of recidivism, and expungement recipients exhibited better employment outcomes quickly. WJI Executive Director Margo Kirchner chats with Meagan Winn, director of Milwaukee County's Eviction Diversion Initiative. The Eviction Diversion Initiative is a new program providing tenants and landlords with information and resources to resolve housing issues both inside and outside of court. Avoiding eviction litigation can be important for tenants, as an eviction judgment from (or even the filing of) an eviction lawsuit can make it difficult for tenants to find future housing. The initiative connects tenants and landlords with resources such as rental assistance, housing counseling, legal assistance, and mediation. Funded by a grant from the National Center for State Courts, the program includes data collection and development of user-friendly court rules and procedures. Milwaukee County was one of the first cohort of states and municipalities selected by the National Center for State Courts for funding to pilot eviction-diversion strategies. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed