Protecting the Unconvicted: Limiting Iowa's Rights to Public Access in Search of Greater Protection for Criminal Defendants Whose Charges Do Not End in Convictions

• Author: Matthew D. Callanan
• Position: J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2013
• Pages: 1275-1308

1275

Protecting the Unconvicted: Limiting

Iowa’s Rights to Public Access in Search of

Greater Protection for Criminal

Defendants Whose Charges Do Not End

in Convictions

Matthew D. Callanan

ABSTRACT: Even when criminal defendants are acquitted of crimes or

their cases are dismissed, many in the public still presume that these people

are guilty. Unfortunately, with an open and public record system such as

Iowa’s, there are risks involved for these unconvicted criminal defendants

even when they are not found guilty of a crime. Iowa’s right of public access

to its online docket allows anyone to search a name, and within a few clicks

the searcher has all the dispositional information of any case in which the

named subject was ever a part. Additionally, since Iowa has no anti-

discrimination statutes regulating the use of criminal history data as a basis

for denial of various applications, Iowa’s decision-makers (employers, school

administrators, landlords, and the like) can consider an y of this

information when evaluating an applicant. As a result, Iowa courts’

openness and the State’s lack of anti-discrimination statutes can have harsh

consequences for criminal defendants who have not been convicted of crimes.

This Note describes those potential consequences, offers and reviews possible

remedies, and then suggests that Iowa adopt new policies that redact

identifying information from the docket and from other court documents as

well. It also suggests that the state legislature should pass anti-

discrimination and regulatory statutes to further protect this class of

citizens.

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1277

II. THE PRESENT STATE OF EXPUNGEMENT LAW WITH REGARD TO

CRIMINAL CASES THAT END IN THE DEFENDANT’S FAVOR ................... 1283

 J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2013; B.A., University of Notre

Dame, 2010. I want to thank all members of Iowa Law Review Volume 98 for their help in

editing this Note.

1276 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 98:1275

A. EXPUNGEMENT LAW AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION STATUTES IN IOWA

FOLLOWING JUDICIAL BRANCH V. IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR

LINN COUNTY ............................................................................... 1283

1. Iowa’s Expungement Statutory Scheme ............................. 1284

2. Equal Protection Status of Unconvicted Criminal

Defendants Under Iowa’s Anti-Discrimination Statutes .... 1286

3. Other Iowa Sealing and Redaction Laws ............................ 1287

B. EXPUNGEMENT LAWS AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION STATUTES IN

OTHER STATE JURISDICTIONS .......................................................... 1288

C. FEDERAL ANTI-DISCRIMINATION STATUTES ..................................... 1289

D. FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO PUBLIC ACCESS AND THE STRUGGLE

TO CLOSE DOCKETS ....................................................................... 1290

III. CONSEQUENCES FOR UNCONVICTED CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS ............. 1292

A. PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ARRESTED OR

CHARGED ....................................................................................... 1293

B. EMPLOYMENT ISSUES FOR UNCONVICTED CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS ..... 1294

C. EDUCATIONAL ISSUES SURROUNDING UNCONVICTED CRIMINAL

DEFENDANTS .................................................................................. 1296

D. BARRIERS TO PUBLIC AND PRIVATE HOUSING FOR UNCONVICTED

CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS .................................................................. 1299

IV. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS OF CRIMINAL-HISTORY-

DATA PROLIFERATION AND DISCRIMINATION BASED ON

NONCONVICTION CRIMINAL RECORDS ................................................ 1300

A. ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION............................................... 1301

B. EXPUNGEMENT/SEALING OF CRIMINAL HISTORY DATA .................... 1302

C. DOCKET AND COURT-RECORD REDACTION ....................................... 1305

V. A PROPOSED SOLUTION FOR IOWA: A HYBRID ADOPTION OF NEW

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION STATUTES AND REDACTING THE DOCKET

AND OTHER COURT RECORDS ............................................................. 1306

VI. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 1308

2013] PROTECTING THE UNCONVICTED 1277

I. INTRODUCTION

“Sometimes it is almost as bad for an innocent person to be prosecuted

as to be convicted.”1 While Professor Williams’ view may strike readers as a

gross exaggeration, in many ways it has merit.2 In fact, in certain situations

within the current Iowa justice system, it may be better for an innocent party

to be convicted than to be acquitted. For example, those charged with

crimes for which deferred judgments3 are possible will most likely be in a

better position—at least after a probation period—than those who have

been acquitted of the same crimes or who have had their cases dismissed

before or during trial.4 The difference stems from the fact that the Iowa

justice system is extremely accessible by the general public.5 Following their

probation period, those with deferred judgments have their records sealed

and placed in a “deferred judgment docket” that is exempt from the Iowa

Code provision mandating access to public documents.6 After recent Iowa

Supreme Court decisions in two sister cases, criminal defendants who have

been acquitted or who have had their cases dismissed do not have the same

opportunity—their charges remain public.7

Even in the majority of situations, where deferred judgments are not an

option, Professor Williams’ view may prove accurate. While a criminal

defendant might actually be better off with an acquittal or a dismissal than

with a conviction, the defendant who has been acquitted or has had his case

dismissed can suffer harsh consequences simply for being charged with the

1. Glanville Williams, Letting Off the Guilty and Prosecuting the Innocent, 1985 CRIM. L. REV.

115, 115.

2. See infra Part III (describing the obstacles faced by criminal defendants whose cases

end in dismissals or acquittals).

3. Section 907.1(1) of the Iowa Code defines a deferred judgment as “a sentencing

option whereby both the adjudication of guilt and the imposition of a sentenc e are deferred by

the court and whereby the court assesses a civil penalty . . . . The court retains the power to

pronounce judgment and impose sentence subject to the defendant’s compliance with

conditions set by the court as a requirement of th e deferred judgment.” IOWA CODE § 907.1(1)

(2011). An Iowa City attorney simplifies it as such: “[T]he charge will be expunged from the

defendant’s record after a successful period of probation.” Deferred Judgments, THOMPSON LAW

OFFICE, http://thompsonjustice.com/iowa-criminal-lawyer-procedure/deferred-judgments (last

visited Nov. 5, 2012).

4. See IOWA CODE § 907.4.

5. See infra Part II.A.

6. IOWA CODE § 907.4 (“The permanent record provided for in this section is a

confidential record exempted from public access under section 22.7 and shall be available only

to justices of the supreme court, judges of the court of appeals, dist rict judges, district associate

judges, judicial magistrates, clerks of the district court, judicial district departments of

correctional services, county attorneys, and the department of corrections . . . .”).

7. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Iowa Dist. Court for Polk Cnty. (Polk Cnty.), 801 N.W.2d 544

(Iowa 2011); Judicial Branch v. Iowa Dist. Court for Linn Cnty. (Linn Cnty.), 800 N.W.2d 569

(Iowa 2011). See infra Part II.A for more information regarding these decisions and their effect

on criminal defendants whose cases ended in acquittal or dismissal in Iowa.