Franklin County Criminal Law Casebook
Reproduced with permission from
David L. Strait and the Franklin County Public Defender Office
Last updated 5/18/2015
State v. Radcliff, 142 Ohio St.3d 78,
2015-Ohio-235, 28 N.E.3d 69-- Sealing of criminal records denied for crime
for which offender has been pardoned-R.C.
2953.52. A court lacks the authority to seal a criminal record of a pardoned
offender who does not meet applicable statutory requirements for sealing the
Harbison v. Bell
(2009), 129 S.Ct. 1481 – Counsel appointed to represent a state court defendant
in federal habeas may also represent that defendant in state clemency
Ohio Adult Parole Authority v. Woodard
(1998), 523 U.S. 272, 118 S.Ct. 1244, 1247 -- "The Due Process Clause is not
violated where, as here, the procedures in question do no more that confirm that
the clemency and pardon power is committed, as is our tradition, to the
executive. We further hold that a voluntary inmate interview does not violate
the Fifth Amendment."
State ex rel. Maurer v. Sheward (1994),
71 Ohio St. 3d 513 -- The Governor's clemency power is subject to the
restrictions set forth in Article III, Sec. 11 of the Ohio Constitution. Under
that provision, the legislature may regulate the manner in which pardons may be
applied for, but may not limit applications for, and the granting of
commutations and reprieves.
Coleman v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority
(1996), 115 Ohio App. 3d 212 -- Death Row inmate challenged clemency procedure
calling for interview, without presence of counsel, to be conducted while appeal
was pending. Basis of challenge was that procedure was a rule which had to be
adopted pursuant to Chapter 119 and
R.C. 111.15. Majority finds declaratory
judgment action was properly dismissed, and suggests State ex rel. Maurer v.
Sheward would have been controlling if it was not, on constitutional grounds
making the rule inapplicable to plaintiff at the time the suit was filed.
Dissent believes procedure amounts to rules and would remand for adjudication on
State v. Taylor (1997), 78 Ohio St. 3d
15, 26 -- A commutation does not erase a conviction. "A commutation is not a
State v. Cope (1996), 111 Ohio App. 3d
310 -- A person granted a pardon is entitled to judicial expungement, even
though he is not a first offender. Prior denial of statutory expungement was not
res judicata. An unconditional pardon relieves the person to whom it was granted
of all disabilities arising from conviction. It is as if the crime had never