High court dismisses expunction petition

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the State Bar of Wisconsin’s seven-year-old request for a rule change that would have allowed people charged with a crime but never convicted to remove those charges from online court records.

Chief Justice Pat Roggensack had made a motion at an April rules conference to dismiss the request. However, it failed on a 3-3 vote. Justice Rebecca Bradley then abstained because she had not been able to review the materials and was not present on the court when the petition was first filed and discussed.

Yet, it was her vote on Thursday that took the petition off the court’s plate.

Justice David Prosser, who originally voted with Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Shirley Abrahamson opposing the petition’s dismissal, requested the petition again be placed on the agenda for Thursday’s meeting. He made a motion, seconded by Rebecca Bradley, to reconsider the dismissal of the petition.

“This is an old petition, and perhaps it is time to start over,” Prosser said.

He said he felt more comfortable about dismissing the petition because of a memo he received from Director of State Courts Denis Moran saying that the matter will likely be taken up by a committee that will be convened to determine what changes need to be made to CCAP in order to implement mandatory e-filing, which the court approved earlier this year.

Rebecca Bradley seconded the motion, saying that she had reviewed the materials related to the petition and was fully informed and able to participate. She noted that the State Bar intends to bring a fresh petition to the court.

“This (petition) is extraordinarily stale,” she said.

The justices voted 5-2 to reconsider the petition, with Ann Walsh Bradley and Abrahamson dissenting.

Justice Annette Ziegler then made a motion to dismiss the petition, seconded by Justice Michael Gableman, and the court voted 5-2, with Abrahamson and Ann Walsh Bradley voting against the motion.

Ann Walsh Bradley said she opposed taking the petition off the table for two reasons. One, she said that the she is not persuaded that a committee has the power or authority to address the concerns in the petition. Second, she said, it was the court that created CCAP.

“This institution has created part of this problem,” Bradley said, “and it is our responsibility to solve this problem.” Follow @erikastrebel