ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: July 11 Recording Uploaded, August 15, September 12 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – Postponed to Oct 10-11


CA: Everyday People Expungement Fair


If you have past criminal convictions of any kind and you want to find out if you can remove it or you need help getting it removed, reduced, or expunged then register for this free expungement clinic.

Saturday, September 8th
10:00 AM to 1:00 PM
Holy Trinity AME Church
200 E. 68th Street, Long Beach, CA 90805

Attorneys and paralegals from the Los Angeles County Public Defenders Office will be onsite providing free post-conviction relief. This event will be in place of our regularly scheduled monthly record changing clinic.
In addition, The following services will be available:

* Record reclassification with Proposition 47, Proposition 64 and expungement services
* Certificate of Rehabilitation referrals
* On-site voter registration and education
* Employment and housing services

What to bring:
• Proof of Identification (Drivers License, Photo ID, Etc.)
• Rap Sheet (Not required)

Registration form


Join the discussion

  1. John Coffey

    This iS a Great out for so many, but none or low level zero on here. Sad.
    Wish that they (:L.A>Public Def. office would of disclosed those they could NOT work on to change) would NOT give false hope to the so many in this State and reading theses and contributes on here.

  2. Scam-99R

    1. Why is a prison sentence, even for a first-time offense, exempt from expungement (i.e. 1203.4)?

    2. When someone gets relief via-1203.4, that should automatically terminate any sex offender registration requirement.

    • Hysteria

      It is not just prison sentences. I got probation on a possession of C.P. and can not get expungement. This is a decision on an offense that shows that government is not interested in reintegration, rehabilitation, or welfare of the offender. Again ,
      “We want to help all of you , Oh, you are a sex offender? …….not you!”.

      • Matthew

        CP cases can get expunged but only if convicted before law change in 2014

        • Hysteria

          Yes, and it is an obvious decision based on political pressure. I read a recent article that 97% of C.P. cases result in a conviction, while only 47% of contact offenses do. It is the prosecutor’s bread and butter, basically a slam dunk. So why not make C.P. offenders a villain, since they can’t get busts on the others. This is a serious abuse of the legal system, when a misdemeanor probation offense is not given even a chance at eventual expungement. I would think this would be considered low hanging fruit for ACSOL. Maybe they are as scared of giving us a chance as the politicians are.

        • David

          @Hysteria: Prosecutors pursuing the easy low-hanging fruit is just a continuation of the usual pattern – the same pattern that we see in the pursuit of convictions but never offering any type of preventative counseling to stop sexual offenses before they occur. This pattern shows a cynical indifference to the human beings involved and a total lack of Interest in actually preventing sexual offences before they occur.

        • M

          can you elaborate on this? i was convicted 2012 for possession and would love more info.

    • New Person

      @ Scam-99R,

      You wrote: ===
      1. Why is a prison sentence, even for a first-time offense, exempt from expungement (i.e. 1203.4)?

      This is a very good question. By not being sent to prison, the court has decided (along with the DA), that the severity of your crime was not worthy of being sent to prison.

      Now, within 1203.4, even if you aren’t sent to prison, there are some sex crime exceptions as well. This point was brought up in a 1958 case, Kelly v Municipal. Because there are some sex crime exceptions for 1203.4, like there are for other crimes for 1203.4, then those who do qualify for 1203.4 with sex crimes can earn all the benefits, including no longer being a part of the PC 290 program. In fact, in Kelly v Municipal, the courts pointed out specifically that PC 290 cannot usurp the benefits being given by 1203.4 to any one who earns 1203.4 – thus, removing one from the registry because they are no longer convicted as the only way onto the registry with by conviction.

      Many recent cases do not emphasize this part of the Kelly v Municipal case, but rather the portion where in-person compulsory police reporting is criminal or quasi-criminal in nature. According to 2003 Smith v Doe decision, in-person reporting is a disability, which is the same result that Kelly v Municipal gave as well.

      Now, since the courts are saying it isn’t punishment, then the keyword used in Kelly v Municipal is “compulsory” in-person police reporting. Compulsory is another word for forced or compelled or involuntary. This “involuntary service” that is deemed not punishment is a violation of the State and Federal law.

      CA Const, Art. 1, Sec. 6 =======
      SEC. 6. Slavery is prohibited. Involuntary servitude is prohibited
      except to punish crime.

      Thus, if the registry isn’t punishment, then the State is in violation of Involuntary servitude via “compulsory” in-person police reporting upon a “free citizen” as defined in 1958 Kelly v Municipal case.

      Either an ACSOL lawyer will pick this up and run with it, or, eventually, I’ll somehow do this pro se. So while I may not know the judge(s), I know what laws were passed and how. Ignorance of the law is no excuse by the State – especially with specific terminology used with “regardless”.

      • Scam-99R

        “This is a very good question. By not being sent to prison, the court has decided (along with the DA), that the severity of your crime was not worthy of being sent to prison.”


        You bring up an interesting point in that judges have great discretion in deciding whether to sentence a person to prison. Why must a judge’s discretion of whether one deserved prison or probation determine whether one might or might not be eligible for expungement in the future? People mature and circumstances change. I bring this up because nothing in 1203.4 specifically exempts one sentenced to prison from obtaining expungement [“or in any other case in which a court, in its discretion and the interests of justice, determines that a defendant should be granted the relief available under this section”].

        I remember when I was about to be sentenced, the original judge stated that he intended to sentence me to probation because of my first-time, non-contact offense. The original judge — a conservative Deukmejian-appointee — was familiar with the facts of my case, having overseen every detail for about two years. The prosecutor, however, used a peremptory challenge and I was forced to be sentenced under a new/young judge who just happened to be a former police detective only SIX YEARS graduated from law school (political connections??). This was in one of the most conservative courts in the county that I live in. Guess what this much younger, new judge (who just happened to be a former police detective) sentenced me to?

        Point is that judges have too much power to condemn a person for life. Why should an elected, politically-motived, figure have so much discretion for what relief one can and can’t obtain in the future?

      • banned

        your right narsol should use this as a legal arguement

  3. Facts should matter

    “Expungement clinic.”

    ^Sounds inviting and promising, doesn’t it?

    Fine print: *those with a prior sex offense are ineligible to participate.

    • NPS

      @Facts Should Mattter

      Why would sex offenses be excluded? Many people who comment here, myself included, have had our cases reduced to misdemeanors and expunged. Most of us are waiting for the 10 year mark so we can start the Certificate of Rehab motion. I personally know someone who successfully was granted their CoR this year and no longer has to register.

      Refrain from giving false ideas simply because this may not be an option for you.

    • John C

      Facts Should Matter, ggod point sir! I am not trolling, it just doesn’t help any (most) of us here, useless.
      ALameda Co. in NorCal has same thing on 2nd Wed. of each month, same thing stated by pro bono law student from Berkeley School of Law…Hysteria stated it…290 oh, sorry can’t help. We had to PAY for parking and wait in an hour and half line. GREAT for those who can use it, other off Prob/Parole. I am not trolling.
      just attempted to understand why this is on this site, AlCo or LACo. I don’t have time for that non-sense…or the monies! See your point Tim X. can it help YOU Sir? I would hope it would/could. Good Day All.

      • AO

        @John C – 1203.4 can’t help some here but it can help others. If this post can help even one person, it was worth posting. And even though CP possession can’t be expunged for newer convictions, those convicted prior to 2014 are grandfathered in and are eligible, as long as they were granted probation.

      • Tim X

        John C,

        No John it cannot help me, I wouldn’t even bother. Expunged presumes I was actually guilty in the first place. I ain’t trying for No pardon either f-dat. That process presumes I was guilty too. A DNA compare would be fine by me but making that go down for real is impossible. If my lawyer had it in 92, jury would had reason doubt. Back then nobody compared so I took a rip for another man’s doing. I wasn’t even in same state at the time of crime. My bad for calling you troll.

      • Hysteria

        I would assume that if you knew ANYTHING about your offense, and you qualified for expungement, then you would already have it done. Although, I have met a few people through therapy that could have had reduction and expungement years ago, and told me they “should probably look into it”. OMG! Really?

  4. AnotherAnon

    @Facts should matter, does that apply to any expunge or just to sex offenses? Say a person as a DUI, can that not be expunged due to also having to register under 290? Do you have a cite?

    • AO

      @AnotherAnon – Your example depends on various factors. One of the factors of expungement is that between whatever you’re trying to expunge when you were convicted of it, you cannot have had any other convictions. So if you got a DUI conviction first and then a sex offense conviction (or any other conviction), you’ve now lost your chance to have that DUI expunged because you’ve demonstrated that you can’t stay out of trouble. But if you got your DUI conviction after your sex offense conviction, you may then be eligible to have it expunged. However, I believe DUI might be on a no expungment list as well as 1203.4 includes several vehicle violations. Not sure what they exactly are, but I imagine a DUI being one of them. Being 290 in itself does not automatically exclude you from expunging other types convictions, and even many 290 convictions can be expunged as well as long as you meat various criteria. This clinic is exactly about educating people on such matters.

  5. New Person

    The problem with expungement is there are two different sets of rules. One for non-sex related crimes and one for sex related crimes.

    Why is there a difference? B/c PC 290.007 chose to disregard law already on the books stating that PC290 cannot supersede 1203.4. A person can only register if they’re convicted as per 1958 Kelly v Municipal decision.

    PC 290.007========
    Any person required to register pursuant to any provision of the Act shall register in accordance with the Act, regardless of whether the person’s conviction has been dismissed pursuant to Section 1203.4 , unless the person obtains a certificate of rehabilitation and is entitled to relief from registration pursuant to Section 290.5 .

    The keyword here is “regardless”. That means this law, PC 290.007, acknowledges what 1203.4 is supposed to do, but disregards it.

    There has been no scientific research done by the state of CA to enable such disregard. But in 1970, the State passed a law that cited unlawful sex with a female minor would not be a registerable offense to distinguish between “consensual” and “forced” unlawful sex with a female minor. Also in 1970, oral and anal sex were illegal in the state of California, including between consenting adults.

    The 1970 ruling did not negate the immunities provided within 1203.4. But PC 290.007j does negate the immunities provided within 1203.4. State Constitution prohibits law(s) being passed that impair obligations of a contract.

    CA Const, Art. 1, Sec. 9===
    SEC. 9. A bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing
    the obligation of contracts may not be passed.

    Which brings us back to the keyword “regardless” in PC 290.007. PC 290.007 is impairing the obligations of the contract set forth within 1203.4. Nowhere within 1203.4 does it state one must continue to register once earning the 1203.4. This was protected in 1958’s decision of Kelly v Municipal – PC 290 cannot supersede 1203.4.

  6. Hysteria

    It would be interesting to see the stats on how many of those expunged for other offenses went on to re commit. Of course they aren’t “bad” people because that expunged offense doesn’t show up now, does it. They can get help with housing, employment, and many other social services. The Apartment next to me is occupied by a drug dealer/ user that is in jail for the 3rd time in three yrs. I wonder how fast he gets his record expunged so he can return to his law abiding ways in a county supplied home. He deserves that 3, 4, 5, ……..chance though.

    • David Kennerly's Government-Driven Life

      Last night, I read that David Rothenberg, the six-year-old boy who received third-degree burns over 90% of his body by his father’s deliberate act back in 1983 (he poured kerosene on him, lit him on fire, then walked out of the motel room leaving him to strangers to save his life), has died. His was a very sad life but one which he was determined to live to its fullest. He was only forty-two. His father, who has since been able to legally change his last name from Rothenberg to “Charles,” served less than seven years for that brutal, ghastly and attempted murder of his son. He went on to commit robbery and other crimes and is finally doing a twenty-year stretch. Shall we contrast and compare his treatment at the hands of the criminal justice system with our own?

  7. Tim Moore

    Most CA 288’s can’t get their record expunged, even if there was no prison. Without the tiered registry, the CA registry will remain bloated with 288’s.

  8. USA

    Well stated NPS! I’m original (1) plea Battery occurred back in the early 90’s! Felony/Wobbler! Summary Probation. Reduced to a misdemeanor 3 years later pursuant to 17B (I contacted LA County/you can download the forms online/mail them in. I did this on my own! I simply mailed in the PC 1203.4 a and it was granted. I did this online and by calling the court. It wasn’t a very difficult process.

    I filed a COR in OC (where I reside) and the DA was out of control. She yelled/had a so called witness (I have no idea who the person was) come in/an alleged other victim wrote a letter to the Judge. It was a Curcus. When I left the court, they blocked the exit and made comments to me? I was in shock. The presiding Judge stated he could find no reason to deny the motion, but it wasn’t enough? (Expunged misdemeanor with summary probation/OC is out of control). I’m presently waiting for 2021 and remaining positive. They can’t deny everyone!

    • Janice Bellucci

      Orange County does not grant Certificates of Rehabilitation. If you are serious about this, you must move to another county. Los Angeles is a good choice.

  9. Figuring It Out

    Trying to make sure I understand…first, aren’t most or all CP charges Federal? If you were convicted of CP (1 count in 2006) in another state (now reside in California and all case files were transferred), you completed 33 months in a Federal prison and now have life-time supervised release (all from a really bad plea deal and currently trying to get off but have been told to wait till you have been out 10 years to even try; I live in the dreaded O.C.) you wouldn’t be eligible for expungement, COR, etc…..correct? I’m pretty sure I know the answer but feel like the ACSOL community sometimes has suggestions or tips that are helpful…not really feeling the wait around and see if we can change the Tier 3 CP fiasco…want to be sure I’m in the best place possible before the new law takes effect. Any suggestions?

  10. td777

    Something everyone here should consider before attempting to get your convictions expunged…it does not relieve you of the requirement to register, nor does it help you get relief from registering.


  11. sun

    How would be the situation if someone get expunged for 288a but not reduction to misdemeanor? can get COR? or which tier would be?

    • Hysteria

      As far as I know, expungement can only be granted after a misdemeanor is addressed. I would look up the tier registry bill and you will see where that offense rests. You can google plot of info you are questioning and get more info.

  12. Drew

    I’d love to register but I know I don’t qualify. I got a 288(a) and 243.4(a)… but 20+ years ago.

  13. USA


    Are you basically stating it’s almost impossible to obtain a COR in OC? I concur. I’m holding out for SB 384. I would be (expunged battery) Tier 1 registering for 23 years (10 years required).

  14. USA

    PS: How did Chance Oberstein obtain a COR? Truly

  15. Steve

    So is expungement possible or not? I plead out in 2003 to a 288.5 and spent 6.5 months in county jail of a 1 year sentence. I was told by my attorney at the time that the Prosecutor said I could have my charges changed or reduced at a later time. I am very fortunate about the way my case went, but after 15 years of registering I would like to find a way off the registry if possible.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *