Expungement of Criminal Convictions: An Empirical Study

Abstract

Laws permitting the expungement of criminal convictions are a key component of modern criminal justice reform efforts and have been the subject of a recent upsurge in legislative activity. This debate has been almost entirely devoid of evidence about the laws' effects, in part because the necessary data (such as sealed records themselves) have been unavailable. We were able to obtain access to de-identified data that overcome that problem, and we use it to carry out a comprehensive statewide study of expungement recipients and comparable nonrecipients in Michigan. We offer three key sets of empirical findings. First, among those legally eligible for expungement, just 6.5% obtain it within five years of eligibility. Drawing on patterns in our data as well as interviews with expungement lawyers, we point to reasons for this serious "uptake gap." Second, those who do obtain expungement have extremely low subsequent crime rates, comparing favorably to the general population-a finding that defuses a common publicsafety objection to expungement laws. Third, those who obtain expungement experience a sharp upturn in their wage and employment trajectories; on average, within one year, wages go up by over 22% versus the pre-expungement trajectory, an effect mostly driven by unemployed people finding jobs and minimally employed people finding steadier or higher-paying work.

Criminal records and college admissions: A modified experimental audit

“…Thus, applicants would have to put off college for a considerable amount of time, often until their late 20s or later, before they could take advantage of these mechanisms. We also do not engage expungements and similar approaches because of their low uptake (see, e.g., Prescott & Starr [] who found that only a fraction of people eligible for expungements in Michigan pursued them), the typically narrow scope of eligible criminal histories, and the lack of an organized movement centered on record sealing and college admissibility. We therefore note these as potential remedies but focus more explicitly on the currently popular approaches to removing criminal records questions from admissions.…”

Suspension, not expungement: Rationalizing misguided policy decisions around cannabis amnesty in Canada

“…The promise of “Real Change” from Trudeau and his Ministers at the outset of their four‐year majority government mandate included a more collaborative, transparent, evidence‐based, and innovative approach to policymaking (Shepherd and Stoney ). Why then, given that other jurisdictions have opted to expunge criminal records in light of evidence that demonstrates the benefits of doing so (Prescott and Starr , ), does Canada stand to fall behind on progressive criminal justice and cannabis policy as the government moves forward with the status quo process outlined in Bill C‐93? To answer this question, what follows borrows from Lydia Miljan’s work on policy instrument choice and rationality as it helps clarify the decision‐making process that resulted in choosing record suspensions over full record expungement.…”

Exclusion and Extraction: Criminal Justice Contact and the Reallocation of Labor

“…Their rates of recidivism were so low that they could not be considered a public safety threat. In addition, set-asides were more likely to be employed and had better jobs than their counterparts whose records had not been expunged (Prescott and Starr 2019).…”

“…In 2018 alone, twenty states reformed their expungement laws to further limit public access to criminal records. Pennsylvania was one, becoming the first state to automatically expunge criminal convictions of minor, nonviolent misdemeanors after ten years of desistance (Prescott and Starr 2019). Multiple efforts are under way, however, to expand the number of expunged cases.…”

“…In a compelling new study, for instance, J. J. Prescott and Sonja Starr (2019) study the efects of expungement laws on rates of recidivism and employment outcomes. They combined criminal records data from the Michigan State Police-which included individuals whose criminal records had been set aside because of expungement as well as the criminal history records for similarly situated individuals whose convictions were not set aside-with detailed wage and employment data from the state's unemployment insurance program for the same individuals.…”