Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Nondisclosure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge denies nondisclosure petition after fees remained unpaid
Summary
A petition for nondisclosure filed by Jacaria Dudley in cause no. 25CCC V0305 was denied after the court concluded she had not completed conditions that require payment of fines and costs under the cited statutory provision.
A judge in the 252nd District Court denied Jacaria Dudley’s petition for nondisclosure, saying the record shows required fines and costs were not paid and the relevant statutory conditions therefore were not met.
The judge said the court looks to the statutory requirement that community supervision be completed, “including any term of confinement and payment of all fines, cost, and restitution imposed,” and ruled that failure to pay prevented eligibility for nondisclosure. “Then I'm going to based on 411073(b), deny the petition for a nondisclosure in this case,” the judge said.
The court record shows Dudley filed a petition for nondisclosure in cause number 25CCC V0305 and the prosecutor indicated the petition was opposed because fees remained outstanding. The prosecutor and defense discussed which statutory section applied; the prosecutor cited provisions that, in the court’s view, require full payment of fees before nondisclosure may be granted.
The judge explained the office’s approach: where the statute specifically requires payment, a discharge from probation that does not include payment of fines and costs does not satisfy the statutory completion requirement for nondisclosure. The judge denied the petition on that basis and directed the clerk to prepare and file the denial.
The denial does not affect any other portion of Dudley’s record beyond the court’s ruling on the nondisclosure petition. The court instructed counsel to confer with court staff to process the written order.
