I recently posted the standards for expunging an EPO/DVO. See LINK.
If you do not qualify, you shouild write a letter to your state
Write your state representative. I have done so and have encouraged clients, readers and potential clients to do the same through this website. Let me again try to incite action!
There is a House of Representative and State Congressman in your district. Look it up online in Kentucky by following this LINK. Tell him/her how the laws on protective orders are unfair and negatively impact your life. You can have a EPO or DVO against you even if you never did anything. The large majority of EPOs and DVOs never relate to any charges or criminal convictions. Point out that the Defendant/Respondent loses valuable constitutional rights: the hearings are held without the right to an attorney, without discovery, without the right to a jury trial and the burden of proof is not beyond a reasonable doubt.
Additionally, the judges often opt in favor of protection instead of actually listening to the evidence and seeing what is provided. A mere allegation of a threat or fear, regardless of whether the fear is rational, is sufficient to many judges in Kentucky. Since they are elected, Judges often make decisions based on “what ifs” in case there is ever a problem how will it look to potential voters in the next election.
There have been recent changes to allow for expungements of EPOs, but it remains incomplete.
The expungement provision relates only to an EPO under KRS 403.745: (a) If a petition under KRS 403.715 to 403.785 did not result in the issuance of a domestic violence order, the court in which the petition was heard may for good cause shown order the expungement of the records of the case if: 1. Six (6) months have elapsed since the case was dismissed; and 2. During the six (6) months preceding the expungement request, the respondent has not been bound by an order of protection issued for the protection of any person, including an order of protection as defined in KRS 456.010. (b) As used in this subsection, “expungement” has the same meaning as in KRS 431.079.
Effective: January 1, 2016
If you have questions or concerns and need legal assistance, contact Michael Bouldin at 859-581-6453 or email email@example.com.
Hello, I recently seen your website when searching Google for answers about a DVO. So 4 years ago my wife and I had got into and argument where I had told her I was going to take my children etc. Well she had got a EPO against me claiming a bunch of stuff that was definitely false so that she could get temporary primary care of the kids, well this was brought before a judge with no evidence of the things that she had said on the paper. The judge for some reason still ruled in her favor and turned it into a 1 year DVO she later went back after about 3 months and tried dismissing the DVO which the judge said that he feels nothing was learned in this and there is a lesson to be learned so he kept it on there till it was lifted after the year. My wife and I have gotten back together after the year of the DVO and I’m unable to pursue my choice of career which is being a police officer. So my question is there anyway I can go before a judge or do anything for that matter to get this taken off me for good so I can live my life and provide for my family and the public. I live in Kentucky and I just want to talk to someone that knows more about this situation. Are these forever permanent and will I never be able to be a “trusted” guy in some eyes?
LAW: There has recently been a change to allow for expungements AT ALL.
ANSWER: Since your case DID result in the issuance of a DVO, there is no provision for sealing or expungement of the record. Send letters and lobby your legislators to pass laws that would allow for expungement of these things. Often these are filed to gain an advantage in a custody case and without any real proof or evidence. The DVO can be granted because the judge simply wants to make sure everyone is safe. Many judges believe that because it is “only a civil case” that it has no effect. Obviously, it DOES affect a persons rights as well as their perception by potential employers Your case is exactly why it is needed.
If you have questions about expungment, EPO or DVO, call attorney Michael Bouldin at 581-MIKE (859-581-6453) and schedule an appointment or email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The state Senate passed a bill which makes a Felony for assaulting a police dog. This bill was approved last Monday and sent it to Republican Gov. Matt Bevin for his signature.
Kentucky is one of six states that consider it a misdemeanor to harm a police dog, according to the United States Police Canine Association. Twelve states make it a felony to harm or kill a police dog regardless of the circumstances, while the penalties in 23 states depend on how bad the dog was harmed.
“Most of the states are falling in line with protections human beings would have as well,” Ferland said. Unfortunately, those in favor fail to align the two. You see, under current law in Kentucky is a misdemeanor to harm another person, not a felony. It is only a felony if you harm a police or other law enforcement officer. It is also a felony if the person has serious physical injury or if the defendant uses a deadly weapon. The new law places the injury to a police dog as similar to injury to a human.
“I didn’t understand it. To me, he’s a partner, he’s a police officer,” Officer Lusardi said. this Officer Lusardi is discussing one particular case where the charge to injuring the dog is a misdemanor. It seems that all stories focus on one or two individual cases and the commitment of the police and the police dogs. The reality is that in the United States, we have the right to confront our accusers under the 5th Amendment to the Constitution. When the accuser is an animal, it is difficult to cross examine a dog.
The suspect in that case also received no jail time for the assault, but was later arrested on other charges, according to Kenton County Commonwealth’s Attorney Rob Sanders. Clearly and rightfully, Sanders supports the police, both human and canine. Like many other PC laws, it is hard to not be in support. That said, in each case where the defendant harmed a police animal, there were significant other felonies for which they were charged. In the specific case often cited by Mr. Sanders regarding Daleon Rice and the police dog, Ernie, the defendant is serving 40 years on his charges. This begs, Do we really need to add another felony charge to this man, or anyone else, for a dog
While I do personally love my dog and many animals, I also see this as a slippery slope. Do we need more felonies? It seems there is currently a push to make any mistreatment of animals a felony.
This article is largely an editorial by criminal defense attorney Michael Bouldin.