HB 3829
Provides that certain traffic offenses may be set aside.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
0%
Oppose
100%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill allows individuals convicted of certain traffic offenses to have their convictions set aside after fully complying with the terms of their sentence. Eligibility is determined by the type of offense and the length of time since conviction or release from imprisonment. The bill outlines specific timeframes for eligibility and includes provisions for expunging arrest records in certain circumstances. It also addresses issues like victim notification and criminal record checks.
Key provisions
- Allows convicted individuals to apply to the court to have traffic offenses set aside.
- Eligibility for setting aside convictions is based on offense type (Class A, B, or C misdemeanor, or violation of contempt) and time elapsed since conviction or release.
- Specific timeframes for eligibility: 3 years for Class B or Class C misdemeanors, 7 years for Class B felonies, and 5 years for Class C felonies.
- Provides a process for expunging arrest records related to charges that were not prosecuted.
- Requires notification to the prosecuting attorney and victim (if any) regarding motions to set aside convictions.
- Mandates a criminal record check by the Department of State Police when a motion is filed.
- Specifies exceptions to the eligibility requirements, including convictions for certain sex crimes and criminal mistreatment.
- Establishes procedures for reopening and disclosing sealed records under limited circumstances.
Who is affected
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Many concern that the proposed legislation does not adequately hold individuals accountable for their actions, particularly those involving reckless behavior. Testimony highlights instances of tragic consequences resulting from under-the-influence driving and distracted driving, suggesting that the bill's leniency may be insufficient to address these serious issues. Opponents argue that stricter penalties or increased accountability measures are necessary to prevent such incidents and ensure public safety. By not taking a stronger stance on reckless behavior, the bill is seen as failing to balance individual freedoms with the need for effective deterrents against hazardous actions.
Source: Testimony Summaries