Relief from a Criminal Conviction (2025 Edition)

An order granting a petition for an expunction of an adult criminal matter has two basic effects. One, it requires deletion of records about the case. Two, it seeks to restore the petitioner to the status he or she had before the proceedings occurred. This discussion briefly describes those effects and their limitations.

Sealing or deletion of records is addressed by the specific expunction statute governing the criminal matter to be expunged and a generally applicable set of procedures on expunctions, G.S. 15A-150 through G.S. 15A-152.

The expunction statutes have required North Carolina courts to delete their records of expunged matters. Revised G.S. 15A-151(a1) and (a2) appear to recognize a system for electronically retaining expunged records, effectively sealing them with limited access. See S.L. 2024-35 (S 565) (eff. July 8, 2024). The statutes direct clerks of court to retain as confidential files records expunged under Article 5 of G.S. Chapter 15A, the article containing the expunction statutes. The clerk of court is to retain these records in accordance with the recordkeeping schedules prescribed by the AOC. The retention period varies based on the nature of the charge and the outcome. For example, the retention period for dismissed matters is 195 days, which aligns with the timing of automatic expunctions. See G.S. 15A-146(a4) (requiring automatic expunction from 180 to 210 days after disposition); N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts, Records Retention and Disposition Schedule, V. Criminal and Infractions (eff. Sept. 18, 2024). The AOC maintains the records in electronic form and makes them available electronically to clerks of court, who may only disclose the existence or content of records from their own county to: the person who is the subject of the record or an attorney representing the person on the expunction; the District Attorney; and the Office of the Appellate Defender on appointment to represent the person who was the subject of the record. G.S. 15A-151(a1), (a2).

The transition from deletion to sealing appears to apply to court records only, as the expunction statutes continue to require other entities subject to an expunction order to “purge” their records of “all entries made as a result of the charge or conviction ordered expunged,” subject to certain exceptions. See G.S. 15A-150(b). The deletion requirement applies to: state and local law enforcement agencies; Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV); Department of Public Safety, Combined Records Section; State Bureau of Investigation (SBI); and other state and local government agencies identified by the petitioner in the petition for an expunction. See AOC-CR-285 (Apr. 2018) (attachment to expunction petition for listing of additional state and local governments agencies that should receive expunction orders); see also G.S. 15A-150(c) (requiring SBI to forward order to Federal Bureau of Investigation). If a state or local agency fails to comply with an expunction order, a person may file a petition for writ of mandamus to compel compliance. See infra Appendixes: Frequently Asked Questions (Reconsideration and Enforcement of Expunction Orders).

For automatic expunctions of dismissals and acquittals under G.S. 15A-146(a4), the clerk is not required to transmit an expunction order to other entities. As a result, other entities may not be aware of automatic expunctions and may not consider themselves obligated to expunge their records. For a further discussion of this result and potential options for relief, see supra Overview: Procedure to Obtain Expunction (Orders).

Not all government records are subject to this deletion command. For example, DMV must expunge its records related to criminal proceedings in most instances but not all.[1] Despite the broad statutory mandate, an older decision held that a prosecutor’s investigative file, which was not open to the public, was not subject to expunction.[2] Changes enacted in 2020, in S.L. 2020-35 (S 562), recognized that an arresting agency may maintain investigative records related to a charge expunged under G.S. 15A-146, the statute on expunctions of dismissals. See G.S. 15A-146(a5). An expunction order might not reach appellate records.[3]

An expunction may or may not require sealing or deletion of records related to an expunged criminal case if they are considered noncriminal matters. For example, the AOC has advised clerks of court that an expunction applies only to a “criminal case and its incidents” and they should not expunge civil judgments for attorneys’ fees, restitution, bond forfeitures, or fines and costs. N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts, Expunction Guide for Clerks at 18 (Civil Records) (June 2024). In some instances, an expunction order could reach criminal records that are part of noncriminal proceedings. See, e.g., State ex rel. Horner v. Buchanan, 293 N.C. App. 472 (2024) (unpublished) (in civil proceeding to remove sheriff, trial judge sealed exhibits containing information about expunged criminal proceeding against sheriff; appellate court did not rule on issue). For a discussion of noncriminal records subject to expunction under noncriminal statutes, such as involuntary commitment proceedings and school discipline, see supra Overview: General Considerations for Expunctions.

The expunction statutes require private entities in the business of compiling and disseminating criminal history record information to delete expunged information for which they have received a notice to delete. See G.S. 15A-152(a). The AOC must provide a deletion notice to private entities to which the AOC has provided bulk extracts of criminal record data, and those entities in turn must provide a deletion notice to entities to which they have passed on the data. See G.S. 15A-150(d). The AOC provides deletion notices for court-ordered and automatic expunctions. The statutes do not require the AOC to give notice to private entities that receive criminal record data by other means, putting the onus on affected individuals to pursue other remedies. If a private entity continues to show criminal record information for which a person has received an expunction, a person may have remedies under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., which covers criminal history information as well as credit information. See also G.S. 15A-152 (providing for civil liability for private entities not regulated by the FCRA or Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act). A person’s rights under the FCRA and procedures to follow are beyond the scope of this guide.[4]

North Carolina law requires the taking of DNA samples on arrest for certain offenses and following conviction for those and other offenses, including all felonies. See G.S. 15A-266.3A(f), (g); G.S. 15A-266.4(b). North Carolina law provides for destruction of these DNA records and samples if the charge is dismissed, the person is acquitted or received a pardon of innocence, and similar dispositions. See infra Expunctions of Dismissals and Similar Dispositions: DNA Records; Charges Remanded or Removed to Juvenile Court. For expunctions of convictions, the applicable statutes state that expunction does not require destruction of DNA samples and records. See G.S. 15A-145.4(h); G.S. 15A-145.5(f) (so stating; 2014 amendment to this subsection deleted exception for fingerprint records, making such records subject to expunction order); G.S. 15A-145.6(i); G.S. 15A-145.9(j); see also 7B-2102(d) (stating that fingerprints and photographs of juveniles are not subject to expunction). Some expunction statutes involving convictions for which DNA samples are required do not address the issue. See G.S. 15A-145.2(c); G.S. 15A-145.8A.

The North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) retains a confidential file of granted expunctions.[5] The clerk of court also must retain, as confidential, records of expunged matters subject to the record retention schedule prescribed by the AOC for all criminal cases. G.S. 15A-151(a1) (effective July 8, 2024). In addition to disclosing this information to the person who received the expunction (discussed supra in Overview: Procedure to Obtain an Expunction (Orders)), disclosure is permissible for the uses discussed below.

The petitioner and petitioner’s attorney should still retain a copy of documents showing the charges and disposition of the case, such as charging documents, orders of dismissal, and judgments. Because of the broad sweep of the expunction statutes, the petitioner may not be able to obtain critical records should they become necessary to show the nature and outcome of the case (for example, in an immigration proceeding in which the underlying charge and disposition are at issue).

Use of Expunged Information

When considering subsequent expunction requests. The AOC may disclose an expunction to a judge for the purpose of ascertaining whether a person charged with an offense previously received an expunction, which is a bar to a further expunction under some statutes. See G.S. 15A-151.

In subsequent criminal proceedings. Under G.S. 15A-151.5((b), prosecutors may use an expunged conviction for the following purposes:

• to determine prior record level for felony sentencing,
• to determine prior conviction level for misdemeanor sentencing,
• to serve as the basis for an habitual offense under G.S. 14-7.1 and G.S. 14-7.26,
• to raise a subsequent offense to a higher level,
• to determine eligibility for relief under G.S. 90-96, and
• when permissible under Rule 404(b) and Rule 609 of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence.

G.S. 15A-151.5 does not authorize other uses of expunged convictions by prosecutors. An expunged conviction would not count as a prior conviction under relief statutes that bar relief if a person has a prior conviction. See infra Appendixes: Frequently Asked Questions (Expunged Convictions).

The provisions of G.S. 15A-151.5 raise some timing concerns. As part of legislation enacted in 2017 expanding expunction opportunities, prosecutors gained the right, effective for expunctions granted on or after July 1, 2018, to obtain a record of the defendant’s prior expunctions to determine a person’s prior record level for felony sentencing only. S.L. 2017-195 (S 445). Under legislation enacted in 2020, S.L. 2020-35 (S 562), prosecutors gained the right to used expunged convictions for the additional purposes in the bulleted listed above. These additional purposes are incorporated into G.S. 15A-151.5(b), which states that it applies to expunctions granted on or after July 1, 2018. The pertinent section of the 2020 legislation, section 2, states that the changes are effective December 1, 2020, but it does not limit the changes to petitions for expunctions after that date. The statute and legislation thus appear to make the additional purposes retroactive. Under ex post facto principles, prosecutors may be limited to using expunged convictions for felony sentencing for petitions filed on or after July 1, 2018, and for the additional statutory purposes for petitions for expunctions filed on or after December 1, 2020. See generally State v. Ramseur, 374 N.C. 658, 677 (2020) (holding that retroactive application of repeal of Racial Justice Act to pending motion for relief violated ex post facto principles; stating that General Assembly may pass “ameliorative laws granting potential relief from crimes and punishment to defendants for crimes already committed, and, having done so, it cannot then withdraw that relief consistent with the Ex Post Facto Clause”).

Under the statutes in effect through 2023, prosecutors could obtain from the AOC information about expunctions under specific statutes listed in G.S. 15A-151.5(a). See also G.S. 15A-151(a)(8) (authorizing disclosure of dismissal pursuant to a conditional discharge on joint request of prosecutor and defendant). Most expunctions were on the list, but a few were not, such as expunged acquittals under G.S. 15A-146(a2) and automatic expunctions under G.S. 15A-146(a4). Effective July 8, 2024, the General Assembly revised G.S. 15A-151.5 to allow prosecutors to obtain all expunction information maintained by the AOC under G.S. 15A-151. See S.L. 2024-35 (S 565). G.S. 15A-151 requires the AOC to collect information of expunctions by petition and order, but the General Assembly may have intended for the AOC make automatic expunction information available to prosecutors as well.

Expunged records may be subject to suppression in subsequent criminal proceedings when not used for a statutorily authorized purpose. See generally State v. Womble, 277 N.C. App. 164 (2021) (denying suppression of DNA records in subsequent criminal proceeding; defendant was not entitled to expunction of records); State v. Swann, 197 N.C. App. 221 (2009) (denying suppression of DNA records in subsequent criminal proceeding; defendant had not obtained order expunging records before their use); see also G.S. 15A-974 (providing for suppression of evidence for statutory violation unless person committing violation acted under objectively reasonable, good faith belief that the actions were lawful).

The statutes do not provide for disclosure to and use by criminal defendants of expunged matters of witnesses against them in a criminal prosecution. Generally, an expunction restores a person’s status and cannot be used against the person, discussed below in notes 7–8 and accompanying text. Whether criminal defendants have a constitutional right to such information to prepare and present their defense is beyond the scope of this guide. See generally Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (recognizing right of criminal defendants to exculpatory evidence, including impeachment evidence); see also Fed. R. of Evid. 609(c) (limiting exclusion of evidence of convictions to those that have been the subject of a pardon, annulment, certificate of rehabilitation, or equivalent procedure or based on a finding of innocence).

For law enforcement employment and certification. As part of earlier legislation expanding expunction opportunities, law enforcement agencies and commissions gained the right to obtain information about expunctions of certain convictions for employment and certification purposes. See S.L. 2011-278 (S 397); S.L. 2012-191 (H 1023); see also S.L. 2023-56 (H 611) (limiting use of some expunctions). Legislation enacted in 2021 provided access by law enforcement agencies and commissions to all expunctions for these purposes, including access to expunctions of dismissals and acquittals. See G.S. 15A-151, as amended by S.L. 2021-107 (H 312); see also AOC-CR-280 (Oct. 2021) (law enforcement application for verification of expunctions).[6] 

The expunction statutes express in various ways the principle that an expunction restores a person’s status as if the proceeding had not occurred. Most expunction statutes state this principle explicitly.[7] Most also state that a person who receives an expunction may not thereafter be held under any provision of law to be guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement for failing to acknowledge the expunged proceedings.[8]

Statutory changes enacted in 2013 sought to clarify and strengthen these protections. G.S. 15A-153 states that the purpose of an expunction is to clear the public record of any arrest, charge, or conviction that has been expunged; to enable the recipient of an expunction to omit reference to the expunged matters to potential employers and others; and to protect the recipient from any charge of perjury or the giving of a false statement. This statute prohibits employers and educational institutions, whether public or private, from asking applicants about expunged arrests, charges, and convictions and gives applicants the right not to provide information about expunged matters. An employer who violates these requirements is subject to a fine by the North Carolina Commissioner of Labor. The statute does not address other private entities, such as landlords. G.S. 15A-153 places additional restrictions on state and local governments. They may not ask applicants to disclose expunged information and, further, must specifically advise them that they have the right not to disclose expunged information.  See also Furthering Fair Chance Policies in State Government Employment, Executive Order No. 158 (Aug. 18, 2020) (prohibiting state agencies from inquiring about expunged convictions). Some newer expunction statutes add that persons required by state law to obtain a criminal history check are deemed not to have knowledge of convictions expunged under that statute. G.S. 15A-145.5(d1) (convictions of nonviolent felonies and misdemeanors); G.S. 15A-145.9(g) (convictions of human trafficking victims).

For the most part, an expunction avoids collateral consequences imposed by North Carolina law. North Carolina governmental entities, such as licensing agencies, must abide by this rule. Some newer expunction statutes direct agencies to reverse any administrative actions taken against a person based on criminal charges or convictions if the person has obtained an expunction. See G.S. 15A-145.4(h); G.S. 15A-145.5(f); G.S. 15A-145.6(i). Limited exceptions exist for law enforcement agencies, which may consider expunctions for employment and certification purposes, and for judges and prosecutors, who may consider expunged information for specified purposes. See Use of Expunged Information, above.

North Carolina law does not prohibit private entities from considering expunged information. Thus, although private employers and educational institutions may not inquire about expunged criminal proceedings, they still may be able to consider expunged information that they otherwise learn about. North Carolina law also does not control consideration of expunged information by other jurisdictions, which may or may not follow the same restrictions. Federal immigration law, for example, does not appear to recognize a North Carolina expunction as a basis for disregarding a criminal conviction.[9]

Finally, in the electronic age in which we live, digital remnants of information about expunged proceedings may remain publicly accessible, which rightly or wrongly entities may hold against a person.[10]