[Cite as State v. Neal, 2017-Ohio-8444.]
COURT OF APPEALS
FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO JUDGES:
Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, P.J.
Plaintiff-Appellee Hon. William B. Hoffman, J.
Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.
-vs-
Case No. 16-CA-38, 16-CA-40
DUSTIN E. NEAL
Defendant-Appellant OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Fairfield County Common
Pleas Court, Case Nos. 11-CR-546,
12-CR-224
JUDGMENT: Reversed and Remanded
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: November 3, 2017
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant
R. KYLE WITT SCOTT P. WOOD
Prosecuting Attorney Conrad/Wood
ANDREA GREEN BOYD 120 East Main Street, Suite 200
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Lancaster, Ohio 43130
239 W. Main Street
Lancaster, Ohio 43130
Fairfield County, Case No. 16-CA-38, 16-CA-40 2
Hoffman, J.
{¶1} Defendant-appellant Dustin E. Neal appeals the judgments entered by the
Fairfield County Common Pleas Court overruling his motions to seal records. Plaintiff-
appellee is the state of Ohio.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE1
{¶2} On December 9, 2011, Appellant was indicted on one count of rape of a
three-year-old child (Case Number 2011-CR-546). The charge was dismissed without
prejudice on June 14, 2012, due to a superseding indictment in Case Number 2012-CR-
224.
{¶3} Appellant was indicted on multiple felonies, including rape and gross sexual
imposition involving the same three-year-old child, on June 1, 2012, in Case Number
2012-CR-224. The charges were dismissed without prejudice on May 24, 2013. Appellee
has not re-filed any charges related to these allegations.
{¶4} Appellant filed motions to seal the record in both cases. On September 21,
2016, the trial court overruled the motion as to Case Number 2012-CR-224, and the court
overruled the motion as to Case Number 2011-CR-546 on October 18, 2016. The trial
court found Appellant was not statutorily eligible to have his records sealed in either case
because the statute of limitations had not expired.
{¶5} Appellant filed an appeal in both cases, and we consolidated the appeals
with Case Number 16-CA-38 controlling. In his brief, Appellant conceded this Court had
ruled contrary to his position in State v. Dye, 5th Dist. Fairfield No. 15-CA-65, 2016-Ohio-
1 A rendition of the facts is unnecessary for our disposition of this appeal.
Fairfield County, Case No. 16-CA-38, 16-CA-40 3
5065. However, Dye was pending before the Ohio Supreme Court on a certified conflict
with the decision of the Eighth District in State v. C.K., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 99886,
2013-Ohio-5135. Accordingly this Court stayed the appeal sua sponte until the Supreme
Court issued an opinion or otherwise resolved Dye.
{¶6} The Ohio Supreme Court issued a merit opinion on September 27, 2017,
and we have lifted the stay. Appellant assigns a single error:
{¶7} THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DETERMINING THAT APPELLANT WAS
STATUTORILY INELIGIBLE TO SEAL RECORDS OF DISMISSED CHARGES.
{¶8} In State v. Dye, Slip Opinion No. 2017-Ohio-7823, the Ohio Supreme Court
reversed the decision of this Court, and held R.C. 2953.52 does not require the relevant
statute of limitations to expire before a trial court can grant an application to seal the
records of a case dismissed without prejudice.
{¶9} Accordingly, Appellant’s assignment of error is sustained.
{¶10} The judgment of the Fairfield County Common Pleas Court is reversed.
This case is remanded to that court for further proceedings according to law.
By: Hoffman, J.
Delaney, P.J. and
Baldwin, J. concur
Fairfield County, Case No. 16-CA-38, 16-CA-40 4
State v. Neal
Combined Opinion