In United States v. Groppo, --- F.4th ---, No. 22-50288 (9th Cir. 2024), the Court affirmed the district court’s denial of Salvatore Groppo’s motion to expunge his conviction for aiding and abetting the transmission of wagering information for his role as a “sub-bookie” in an unlawful international sports gambling enterprise.
The Court held that because Groppo alleged neither an unlawful arrest or conviction nor a clerical error, the district court correctly determined that it did not have ancillary jurisdiction to grant the motion to expunge. The panel explained that a district court is powerless to expunge a valid arrest and conviction solely for equitable considerations, including alleged misconduct by the IRS.
[W]e have held that “a district court’s ancillary jurisdiction is limited to expunging the record of an unlawful arrest or conviction, or to correcting a clerical error.” Sumner, 226 F.2d at 1014. And a defendant requesting expungement for her unlawful conviction must have first “obtained a judgment that her conviction must be vacated or otherwise set aside.” Crowell, 374 F.3d at 797. By contrast, a district court is powerless to expunge “a valid arrest and conviction solely for equitable considerations” because such relief falls outside its ancillary jurisdiction. Sumner, 226 F.2d at 1014.
