Dan Williamson, Appellant-Petitioner v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] In April 2025, Dan Williamson filed a “Verified Petition for Expungement of Infraction” under Indiana Code section 34-28-5-15 asking the trial court to “restrict access/disclosure” of information related to five traffic infractions that he had been charged with between 1989 and 1999. Appellant's App. Vol. 2 pp. 5-7. Section 34-28-5-15, which governs disclosure of information related to infractions, provides, in relevant part:

(b) Not earlier than five (5) years after a person:

(1) whose prosecution for an infraction has been deferred; or

(2) who was found to have violated a statute defining an infraction;

has satisfied the conditions of the deferral program or the judgment imposed for the violation, the person may petition the court to prohibit disclosure of information related to the infraction to a noncriminal justice organization or an individual. The court shall order the clerk and the operator of any state, regional, or local case management system not to disclose or permit disclosure of information related to the infraction to a noncriminal justice organization or an individual if the court finds that the person satisfied the judgment or conditions of the deferral program and at least five (5) years have passed since the date the person satisfied the judgment or conditions of the program.

(Emphasis added). The State filed a response expressing no opposition to the petition, but the trial court denied it without explanation.

[2] Williamson now appeals, arguing the trial court erred in denying his petition because he “met all the requirements in [Section 34-28-5-15] for restriction of records.” Appellant's Br. p. 7. The State agrees that Williamson “satisfies the statutory criteria, made the requisite showing in his petition, and was therefore entitled to the restriction of access to and disclosure of his traffic infractions.” Appellee's Br. p. 6. We therefore reverse the trial court and remand with instructions to “order the clerk and the operator of any state, regional, or local case management system not to disclose or permit disclosure of information related to the infraction[s] to a noncriminal justice organization or an individual” as required by Section 34-28-5-15(b).¹

[3] Reversed and remanded.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In his petition, Williamson specifically asked the trial court to restrict access to his infraction records in “the files of the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles.” Appellant's App. Vol. 2 p. 7. But as the State notes on appeal, “Indiana Code section 34-28-5-15(b) does not apply to the BMV because the BMV is not an ‘operator of any state, regional, or local case management system.’ ” Snow v. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, 194 N.E.3d 1138, 1142 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022). Williamson did not file a reply brief to challenge this.

Vaidik, Judge.

Bailey, J., and Scheele, J., concur.