Relief from a Criminal Conviction (2023 Edition)

For convictions on or after July 1, 1975, a conviction based on a no contest plea is both subject to expunction and a bar to expunction of other matters if the plea is for an offense specified by the expunction statute. For convictions before July 1, 1975, the answer to each question may diverge.

In North Carolina, a person may be convicted of a criminal offense in three ways: by pleading guilty, by pleading no contest, or by pleading not guilty and being found guilty by a judge or jury. If a person enters a no contest plea, the person neither admits nor denies guilt, which limits the use of the criminal conviction in a later civil lawsuit against the person for the conduct alleged in the criminal case. See Michael G. Okun & John Rubin, Employment Consequences of a Criminal Conviction in North Carolina, Popular Gov’t, Winter 1998, at n.65 and accompanying text. In other respects, a conviction based on a no contest plea is like other criminal convictions, at least for convictions on or after July 1, 1975. Effective that year, the General Assembly revised the law to require the court to find a factual basis for the criminal charges before accepting a no contest plea and entering a judgment of conviction. S.L. 1973-1286 (H 256) (adding G.S. 15A-1022(c) requiring such a finding). Thus, on or after that date, a conviction based on a no contest plea includes an adjudication of guilt.

Before July 1, 1975, the court in a criminal case could impose a judgment and sentence based on a no contest plea but could not adjudicate the person guilty; without an adjudication of guilt, “there was not a conviction to be used in another case.” Davis v. Hiatt, 326 N.C. 462, 466 (1990) (reviewing case law and finding that after change in law a conviction based on a no contest plea counted as a conviction in later proceeding to revoke a driver’s license); State v. Outlaw, 326 N.C. 467, 468–69 (1990) (reviewing case law). The conviction should still be subject to expunction because the record will still show that the person has a conviction and will be viewed as such by employers, landlords, and others. In light of the above decisions, however, the conviction would not appear to constitute a prior conviction for the purpose of a prior-conviction bar because it does not involve an adjudication of guilt.