May, J.
B.S. appeals the partial denial of his petition for expungement. Pursuant to Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1, the trial court granted expungement of the records from the criminal cause number under which B.S. was convicted, but the court denied B.S.’s request to expunge all the records from the postconviction cause number in which B.S.’s underlying conviction was vacated. As the post-conviction relief records should also have been expunged under Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1, we reverse the trial court’s denial of that portion of B.S.’s petition and remand with instructions.
….
Herein, the trial court found the PCR records could not be expunged because “such causes are not covered under Indiana Code § 35-38-9 et seq.” (Confidential App. Vol. II at 29.) However, Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1 states “no information” regarding expunged cases shall be maintained in various state information systems, I.C. § 35-38-9-1(f) (emphasis added), and “any records” shall be sealed or redacted. Id. (emphasis added). B.S. argues that, as the final result of a vacation of a conviction from a PCR case is the same as the final result of a vacation from a direct appeal, the trial court should have expunged his PCR case and sealed those records accordingly. The PCR proceedings, although under a separate cause number, necessarily include information and records of the conviction from which a petitioner is seeking expungement relief. Thus, we must determine the scope of the legislature’s intent.
….
Here, the intent and the policy underlying Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1 are the same as the intent and policy analyzed in J.B., i.e., expungement allows an individual, who satisfies certain criteria, to escape the stigma of a criminal conviction by “sealing off the paper trail establishing that there ever was a conviction.” J.B., 558 N.E.3d at 340. B.S., because he qualifies for expungement under the statute, is able to escape the stigma of his now overturned criminal conviction; however, in order to do so, all records pertaining to that conviction must be sealed. This includes, by necessity, the PCR case wherein that criminal conviction was vacated. To accept the trial court’s contention PCR records are not included in the expungement statute would thwart the intent of the legislature. See id. (if dismissed cases not included in expungement, the expungement is “meaningless”) Accordingly, we must reverse the trial court’s partial denial of B.S. petition for expungement and remand for the court to enter an order expunging the records from B.S.’s underlying criminal cause number and from his post-conviction cause number in accordance with Indiana Code section 35-38-9-1.
Conclusion
Although the expungement statute does not specifically mention PCR records, the intent behind the statute is to allow the petitioner to return to his or her former state without stigma. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s partial denial of B.S.’s petition and remand for the trial court to issue a new order in accordance with this opinion.
Reversed in part and remanded with instructions.
Vaidik, C.J., and Altice, J., concur.