Beverly Hills Arrest for Battery Penal Code 243(d) Sealed

In September of 2008, the Beverly Hills Police Department arrested our client, age 46, for allegedly violating Penal Code § 243(d), also known as misdemeanor battery with serious bodily injury. The alleged victim was another female who lived nearby our client, but was not romantically associated with our client. The two had a disagreement over how each other treated the other. Both our client and the other lady were Asian.

In October 2008, the Airport District Attorney’s Office decided to not file a criminal complaint against our client based on insufficient evidence and mailed her a letter notifying her of this decision, enclosing a certificate of detention.

Our client believed the potential for a reputation as a violent person, or at least someone who had anger issues and could inflict “serious bodily injury” on another person, was avoided. However, she was wrong because the record of the arrest remained on her record, stigmatizing her whenever she applied for a job or was eligible for a promotion.

Finally, in 2022, she decided to move to Portugal to get away from the United States and the discrimination she felt was pervasive here. She called up a company that advertised as a law firm and told her they could “expunge her record” for $2,000.

Our client hired the firm to remove the entry from her criminal history, which the firm called “expungement.”

After several months of waiting for the company to finish their work, she called Greg Hill & Associates and asked if we had ever heard of the company.

She spoke with Greg Hill, who explained that the client was not eligible for “expungement” because she was never convicted. What she was eligible for to delete the record of her arrest was sealing under Penal Code §§ 851.91 and 851.92. Greg explained that Penal Code § 851.91(a) states, “a person who has suffered an arrest that did not result in a conviction may petition the court to have his or her arrest and related records sealed, as described in Section 851.92.”

Here, our client suffered an arrest that did not result in a conviction when the Airport District Attorney’s Office rejected filing a complaint against her after reviewing the facts that led to the arrest in September 2008.

The client explained why she wanted the sealing, as she was unemployed and living in a very precarious financial situation. She had minimal savings for himself and fears she will not be able to continue to support herself. She also explained that she was in the process of applying for an extended stay Visa to Portugal. However, she knows it will be difficult, if not impossible, with this record for battery with serious bodily injury. This was having a crippling impact on the healing of her personal life.

She then retained Greg Hill & Associates and we filed the petition to seal within a week. Within a month, there was a hearing on the petition. The District Attorney assigned to the department for the hearing did not oppose the petition and the judge granted our client’s request. Greg even got a signed order from the judge the same day as the hearing.

In Greg’s email to the client, attaching the signed order and explaining the hearing, Greg recommended that the client read the order, as it stated what “sealing” allowed the client to say now in response to any inquiry about the arrest, depending upon who asked.

Greg also explained that he customarily told the client that the DOJ does not update one’s criminal history the same day as the judge makes the ruling on the petition, and it may not do so for a few days or even a week or two. Greg explained that the clerk at the Airport Courthouse did have the authority, access or power to make the changes to the client’s DOJ record. He just asks the DOJ to act on the signed order.

---