NY Senate Leader Backs Expunging Criminal Records in Marijuana Legalization
That position could set the stage for a legal disagreement between members of the Senate and Gov. Andrew Cuomo, whose administration has argued that lawmakers would need to amend the state constitution to allow expungement of those records over sealing.
May 15, 2019 at 04:05 PM
5 minute read
The leader of the New York State Senate said Wednesday that she would prefer low-level marijuana-related criminal records to be expunged, rather than sealed, as lawmakers continue negotiations on how to legalize the drug sometime in the next five weeks.
That position could set the stage for a legal disagreement between members of the Senate and Gov. Andrew Cuomo, whose administration has argued that lawmakers would need to amend the state constitution to allow expungement of those records over sealing.
Sealing someone's record shields it from public view, but still allows it to be seen by members of law enforcement with a court order. Expungement permanently destroys someone's criminal record, making it as if that person had never been accused of the crime.
Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, D-Westchester, took a beat when asked by the New York Law Journal if she preferred expungement over sealing at a press conference Wednesday. She then took a position.
“I think they should be expunged,” Stewart-Cousins said.
That may not be reflected in a new bill to legalize marijuana that's expected to be introduced in the coming weeks, according to Democrats who sponsor the legislation. Marijuana legalization has largely been pushed by State Sen. Liz Krueger, D-Manhattan, and Assembly Majority Leader Crystal Peoples-Stokes, D-Buffalo.
When asked about the contents of that bill this week, Peoples-Stokes said it will “mirror” legislation proposed earlier this year by Cuomo to legalize marijuana in New York. Cuomo's proposal would have only sealed criminal records for low-level marijuana-related convictions.
“What it essentially does is mirrors the governor's proposed cannabis legislation that was in his budget, because it was made up of not just the legalization of adult use but it also enhanced the regulations for medical marijuana and enhanced the regulations for hemp,” Peoples-Stokes said. “So, just mirroring his legislation.”
Peoples-Stokes declined to take questions from the New York Law Journal on Wednesday as to whether the new bill would opt for sealing versus expungement. An adviser to Peoples-Stokes said one of the two options is expected to be included in the bill.
Cuomo's office has said that lawmakers may not be able to pass legislation this year that would allow low-level marijuana convictions to be expunged, which is why they opted to include a sealing provision in his proposal instead.
Alphonso David, counsel to Cuomo, said during a hearing on the state budget earlier this year that lawmakers would likely have to amend the state constitution to allow expungement of those records. That would take years and require approval from voters.
“We've taken a position that sealing is actually something we can do statutorily,” David said. “There are still questions about whether or not you can advance an expungement proposal legislatively. Rather than debate that and expose this legislation to a legal challenge, we advanced a proposal based on sealing.”
The issue of marijuana legalization has been among the most contentious between Cuomo and lawmakers this year. The leaders of both legislative chambers, along with Cuomo, have all agreed to support legalization but haven't come to a consensus on what that will look like.
Cuomo's proposal from January, which Peoples-Stokes said will be reflected in the new bill, would essentially create a new industry in New York related to cannabis. It would establish an Office of Cannabis Management that would license marijuana producers, distributors and retailers. There's no timeline on when the drug would be on the market.
The proposal also would have used state revenue generated from the sale of marijuana to invest in communities that were disproportionately harmed by the state's laws on the drug. Stewart-Cousins said Wednesday that's been important for members of her conference.
“As we look at creating a new industry, we want to make sure we learn from others who have already done it and that there's always a conversation about communities disparately impacted by the previous prosecution of this very same product,” Stewart-Cousins said. “I think a lot of it has to do with how are we going to change the conversation, the economy, as well as the prosecution around marijuana.”
Peoples-Stokes confirmed this week that the new bill would include that provision, but would also divert funding to training for law enforcement to monitor road safety and public protection. The latter provision was also included in Cuomo's proposal.
Marijuana legalization was initially expected to be passed by the end of March as part of this year's state budget. That didn't happen. Lawmakers couldn't come to an agreement with Cuomo on the legislation before the budget deadline and decided to consider it after the spending plan was resolved.
Stewart-Cousins said Wednesday that discussions are ongoing between Cuomo and lawmakers on the issue, but that it was guaranteed to be resolved by the end of this year's legislative session.
“The conversations around marijuana and some of these things that have come up before are ongoing, and I don't know that we will have a resolution by the end of session but obviously it's an issue that people are paying attention to,” Stewart-Cousins said.
Lawmakers have the next five weeks to come to a deal on the issue before they leave Albany for the year.
READ MORE:
Cuomo, Lawmakers Announce Deal on State Budget, Criminal Justice Reforms
Cuomo Details Marijuana Legalization, Criminal Justice Reform in NY Budget Speech
NY Lawmakers Fret How Legal Marijuana May Complicate Motor Vehicle Law
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRelaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute readBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Dismisses Defamation Suit by New York Philharmonic Oboist Accused of Sexual Misconduct
- 2California Court Denies Apple's Motion to Strike Allegations in Gender Bias Class Action
- 3US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 4Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 5African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250