Just because a website looks good or similar to ours, we advise you to do the following things:

1) Your criminal record is a serious matter. Make sure you only hire an attorney to file the papers with the court.

2) Ask your attorney questions about his or her experience. How many petitions for pardon/clemency, expungement/sealing has the attorney filed?

3) Ask you attorney how long he or she has been practicing law.

4) Compare attorneys…don’t be mislead…

Prior to 2012, people who were sentenced to supervision for misdemeanor retail theft had to wait 5 years after the successful termination of supervision to file to expunge their record.

Now, however, people no longer have to wait 5 years to expunge. Instead, it’s just 2 years after successful termination of supervision.

Keep in mind, if you have more than a retail theft arrest on your record, you may not be eligible to expunge. All cases – in every Illinois county and any other state outside of Illinois – must be evaluated to determine if one is eligible to expunge or seal.

We have focused our practice on expungement/sealing/pardons for almost 7 years. We follow the laws closely and we understand how to evaluate each person’s record.

Please call us at any time if you have questions: The Law Firm of Tamara N. Holder, LLC – 312-332-4629 – Chicago, Illinois

*posted by Rachel Kittler, Law Firm of Tamara N. Holder, LLC

Most people are under the mistaken impression that their juvenile court proceedings won’t hold them back. Unfortunately, this is not necessarily the case in Illinois. While there are several mechanisms in place to help juvenile offenders, there are still pitfalls in the law forcing juveniles into harsh circumstances.

In Illinois, you become an adult at age 17. The law states that “Except…(exceptions)…, no minor who was under 17 years of age at the time of the alleged offense may be prosecuted under the criminal laws of this State.” [705 405/5-120] That is not to say that juveniles may exist outside the law. There are still juvenile proceedings for alleged offenders, but rather than being convicted they are found “delinquent.” Delinquent juveniles may be sentenced by judges for their offenses, but delinquency does not qualify as a conviction and may be expunged eventually. Sounds good, right?

Well, the problem comes with those listed exceptions. Most of the exceptions are for severe cases. For example, a 16 year old accused of first degree murder may be prosecuted for that offense like an adult. However, there is one exception that allows for any minor alleged to have violated a municipal or county ordinance to be prosecuted and punished under Illinois statutes. The idea behind this exception is likely to make sure that juveniles still have to pay fines for petty offenses, like parking tickets.

Unfortunately, this broad exception allows for juveniles to be convicted of any ordinance violation, including the criminal convictions the law is designed to protect juveniles from. An arrestable ordinance violation counts as a conviction under Illinois expungement law. There is no exception for juvenile offenders. This means that a person may be prevented from expunging their criminal record because of a small offense they committed as a juvenile.

This is precisely what happened to a client of ours. At twelve years old, he was caught by the police with a small about of cannabis. If he had been charged under the Illinois criminal statute, he would have likely been found delinquent and could expunge the case when he turned 21. Instead, he was prosecuted under the local ordinance for possession, and was therefore convicted. His punishment was simply to pay a fine, so the whole process was likely done with good intentions to protect the kid. But contrary to those intentions, he now has a conviction on his record and may no longer expunge.

He is still eligible to seal, which would be fine for most people. Except in this circumstance it does not, because the client wants to become a police officer and the police are one of the few allowed to see sealed records. Many police departments have automatic denials for any potential officer with a drug conviction. So, because of a small mistake that the client made when he was twelve, he is not able to become a police officer.

The Aldermen’s motive is not necessarily to decriminalize the possession of pot; instead, it is to allow the City to make money without requiring police and court time to prosecute the crime. Solis told the AP, “In these trying times of the economy, we could really use the revenue generated by fines versus arrests…and each (arrest) means police officers are spending an inordinate amount of time outside the neighborhoods, inside the district offices doing paperwork.”

Alderman Joe Moreno (1st)  incorrectly stated in his piece on The Huffington Post, “Anyone caught with 10 grams or less will be issued a $200 fine, instead of being arrested, and given a record for life, as is currently the case.”

Clearly, the Aldermen did not review the Illinois Criminal Identification Act, which states that felonies, misdemeanors and local ordinance violations quality for expunging and/or sealing. The Act also states that 1) a fine = a “conviction” and 2) if you have a conviction on your record, you cannot expunge your record, you can only seal it. A conviction also prevents one from expunging any other part of their record. So if a person fined for an ordinance marijuana charge has something else on his record, he now cannot expunge the other cases.

So are the Aldermen looking to raise revenue for the City or are they looking to protect citizens who are users of small amounts of marijuana? Thus far, this ordinance looks like it’s an idea cloaked in “what’s good for the people” but really it’s only about what’s “good for the city.”

I can only assume that Blago hopes to have a Miracle on 34th Street moment in which thousands of letters are dumped onto the judge’s bench. The idea is that the judge would then show leniency in sentencing Blago for his several convictions.

As I read this, I couldn’t help but appreciate the irony of the situation. When a pardon petitioner seeks executive clemency, he will almost always supplement his petition with character letters in support of the petitioner. Now, Blagojevich is attempting to do something very similar by obtaining character letters of support for his sentencing.

When Blagojevich was Illinois Governor, he let thousands of pardon petitions sit pending with no decision. This is the cowardly way to deal with pardon petitions. Rather than actually taking a stand and risking political backlash one way or the other, Blago simply kept his mouth shut (the first time I’m sure). Current Governor Quinn is still working through the Blagojevich backlog that accumulated from as far back as 2003.

Ask any pardon petitioner and they will tell you that the wait is the hardest part of the process. Most would rather receive a denial than no decision at all. At the very least, a denial would allow the petitioner to re-file. But “pending” just means more sleepless nights of not knowing.

When thousands of convicted felons reached out for help from then Governor Blagojevich, he simply turned the other way. But now that Blago himself is in that same helpless position of being a convicted felon, he hopes to receive the help that he never gave when he was in a position to do so.

Honestly, I do feel for the guy. I fear he may get an excessive sentence simply because there was such a spotlight on this entire case, and people want their pound of flesh. But I still can’t help but appreciate the ways in which fate can toy with people.

From New York to Colorado, Wall Street protestors are standing their ground, and if anything, gaining followers by the hour. Members of Occupy Chicago marched this past Wednesday to City Hall to convince Mayor Rahm Emanuel for permission to house themselves in Grant Park and to drop the charges against the arrested protestors. That request, by way of petition including 13,000 signatures, was denied by city officials yesterday.
Protestors are debating inhabiting Grant Park again this weekend despite the over 300 arrests that have already occurred since the start of the protest in Chicago 5 weeks ago. Almost 200 of these arrests were made after members refused to clear out of the park after closing time of 11pm. The Chicago PD even attempted a compromise allowing protestors to sleep overnight in their vehicles without being ticketed. Deciding to house themselves again in Grant Park this weekend will undoubtedly result in more arrests by the Chicago Police Dept. Some members have already been arrested more than once.

What are Occupy Chicago members being charged with?

Misdemeanor trespassing….which some are calling asinine. But that’s not all…they are also receiving $125 citations. Members were arrested, taken down to the station where they were finger printed, and then processed.
Although they were released soon after, they have all acquired an arrest record. That’s right—asinine or not, they ALL have a record now. Although most protestors may see their arrests as ‘no big deal’, these arrests will remain on their record. Even if their cases are dismissed, they will need to seek remedy through sealing or expungement.

Interested in clearing your criminal record? We can help you! Call 312-981-1414.

**This blog posting is not to be relied upon as any legal advice.

*posted by Rachel Kittler

(photo courtesy of msnbc)

Most people seeking a pardon from the Governor absolutely dread the day they must appear before the Illinois Prisoner Review Board for their clemency hearing.

For me, however, I actually look forward to attending more pardon hearings.

As a new addition to The Law Firm of Tamara Holder, LLC, I witnessed my first pardon hearings just last week inChicago.

I quickly realized I shared more similarities with the petitioners than I expected, even though I don’t have a felony conviction.

On the morning of the hearings, I arrived almost an hour early because I had never been to theThompsonCenter(where the hearings are held twice a year) and also because I was slightly nervous. I checked in all of our clients with the Board and greeted each client as they arrived with their family and friends who would be testifying for them as character witnesses. I feel that my presence comforted them. After all, up to this point, I had only known our clients from phone conversations. (In fact, some of them I had never even spoken to before.) Being new to the pardon process myself, I was in anticipation of the unknown, but it literally comforted me knowing they were somewhat nervous as well.

I think the most important thing for a person seeking a pardon is to be honest and present your self in a humble way to the Board. Also, if you are considering seeking a pardon, be sure to ask questions! I had many questions before, during, and after the hearing! I really did not know what to expect until I actually sat through the entire experience.

Ask an attorney about the process because it’s quite complex, even though the Board offers some information on their website. At our law firm, we invite you to call or email us at any time and ask as many questions as you want. We are happy to educate you about the pardon/clemency process, regardless if you hire us.

One of our clients requested her hearing to go after a few others so that she could see how they presented their pardons.  This actually benefited me as well for a few reasons:  First and foremost, it made me realize that retaining an attorney is the ONLY way to present your pardon so that you are ensured that you’re petition is prepared in the most complete and professional form.

This was made obvious when one of the first petitioners represented herself without an attorney.  She did not disclose a DUI from the past and thought it would not affect her request for a pardon of a felony conviction. Boy was she wrong! When the Prisoner Review Board brought the undisclosed arrest to her attention, she stated, “But that wasn’t a felony conviction.” They continued to ask her about it as she continued to dismiss the incident. Do not think something from your past doesn’t matter, because it does – disclosure goes to the heart of your character, that you are honest and that your entire past is an open book. If you retain our law firm, we make it clear that it’s important to disclose every aspect of your criminal history.

Watching the pardon hearings also helped me formulate additional questions for the attorneys in the office so that I can share my personal experience with people who call our office seeking information about the process.

What next? Now we play “the waiting game” to hear of Governor Quinn’s decision to grant (or deny) the petitions.

Please call us if you have any questions about your criminal record or the pardon process.

The Law Firm of Tamara N. Holder, LLC
19 S. LaSalle St., Suite 1500
Chicago, IL 60603
(312) 981-1414 (phone) or (312) 332-4629 (fax) or holderlaw@gmail.com (email)

PROCESS: Pardon filing –> Pardon hearing before Prisoner Review Board –> Board votes on whether they think  Governor should/should not grant your pardon –> Regardless of their non-binding opinion/vote,  Board must send your pardon to Governor –> Pardon sits on Governor’s desk until he grants/denies Pardon; Governor does not have to follow opinion of Board (he can deny a petition that the Board believed to be worthy of a pardon; he can grant clemency when the Board did not think it was worthy of a pardon) –> We are notified if pardon is granted or denied –> If denied, we must wait 1-year to re-file; if granted, we file a Petition to Expunge the court/arresting agency records.

Here is what to expect after you have filed your petition & appeared before the Board for a hearing:

1. AFTER THE HEARING, THE BOARD VOTES ON YOUR PETITION:

• The Illinois Prisoner Review Board votes on whether they think the Governor should grant your pardon. This vote generally occurs right after the hearing, or shortly thereafter.
• Confidential Board decision: The Board’s opinion to the Governor is confidential. There is no way to find out their opinion.
• Board’s non-binding advisory opinion: The Board does not grant or deny the pardon. They simply tell the Governor what they think. The Governor can grant a pardon they didn’t recommend; conversely, the Governor can deny a pardon that they recommended. Only the Governor grants or denies pardons.

2. AFTER THE BOARD’S VOTE, THEY SEND THE PARDON TO THE GOVERNOR:

• After the Board votes on your petition, they send your pardon to the Governor’s office with their non-binding opinion as to whether the Governor should grant or deny your pardon.
• The Board must send all petitions to the Governor, regardless of their opinion.
• Timeframe of Board sending pardon to Governor: The law does not require that the Board send your pardon to the Governor within a specific timeframe; but based on my understanding of the Board’s current procedure, they send the petition to the Governor very soon after the hearing & vote because the Board must prepare for the next set of filings.

 3. AFTER THE GOVERNOR RECEIVES THE PARDON FROM THE BOARD, WE MUST WAIT FOR HIS DECISION:

• After the pardon is received by the Governor’s office, it’s reviewed by his staff & then the Governor decides whether to pardon or to deny the petition.
  Timeframe for Governor’s decision: There is no timeframe that requires the Governor to decide on your petition – he can grant/deny the petition immediately upon receipt from the Board or he can grant/deny the petition years after receipt of the pardon. We are now in a holding pattern that’s out of our control.
• Order of granting/denying petitions: There is no order that the Governor is required to follow. You may see in the news that he’s granted pardons filed more recently or later than yours.
• Status: There is no way to call the Governor or the Board and find out what’s going on with your petition. There is currently a backlog left from Gov. Blagojevich so the wait can be several years.
• The only thing you can expect is a decision before the Governor leaves office; however, if the Governor is re-elected, he does not have to decide on previously filed pardons.
• No decision = no news because that means your pardon is still pending. There is nothing we can do except wait for a decision. We cannot re-file while the petition is pending.
• Denial: If the Governor denies your petition, the law requires you wait 1-year to file a new petition. There is no limit on the number of times you re-file, so long as you wait 1-year after each denial. Hopefully, we won’t be denied the 1^st time!
• In the event you’re granted a pardon or the petition is denied, we will contact you immediately.
  If you have not heard from us, it is because we have not received an answer.

  If you have any questions about the process, please call us at any time 312-981-1414 or email us at holderlaw@gmail.com.
  www.xpunged.com

Yesterday was the day for the Chicago hearings for the pardon petitions filed in July. The hearings are held before the Prisoner Review Board, who then make a confidential recommendation to Illinois Governor Patrick Quinn as to whether he should grant the petition or not.

At the hearings, the board will ask all sorts of questions delving into the life of the petitioner, especially when it comes to criminal history. One of the frustrating things I see at these hearings is when petitioners aren’t prepared for these types of inquiries. Usually the unprepared are the ones filing without an attorney. People seem to believe that pardon consideration will only apply to the particular cases that require pardoning. It doesn’t.

I watched one hearing for a woman that filed without an attorney. She apparently did not disclose in her petition an arrest for a DUI that occurred later in life. Her original crime that she requires the pardon for was a possession of a controlled substance. While these aren’t necessarily the same crime, they both suggest the same inability to manage one’s life in relation to recreational drugs. This is definitely something that the Review Board considers, and takes very seriously.

So when this petitioner was making the argument that she is now a good person, the board cut her off to ask about “hidden” DUI. Of course, her response was, “Yeah, but that wasn’t a conviction.” I cringed as soon as I heard that. First of all, by not disclosing the arrest the Board is probably already suspicious of her entire petition. Second, the lack of conviction does not exclude consideration. There is no “innocent until proven guilty” here. The board members are humans and all humans will make presumptions in that situation.

For me, this was just another example of a pardon petitioner that really could have used an attorney. She actually would have had a pretty good case if someone with experience could have framed her argument properly. An attorney would have also known that it is always better to err on the side of disclosure.