Sealing and Expunging a Massachusetts Criminal Record

Massachusetts law allows eligible criminal records to be sealed or expunged. Sealing limits third-party access to a record but does not destroy it. Expungement permanently erases or destroys a narrower category of records maintained by Massachusetts courts, criminal-justice agencies, and state, county, or municipal agencies.

Eligibility depends on the disposition, offense, dates of the offense and disposition, any custody or supervision, the person’s complete criminal and juvenile record, and whether the case proceeded to arraignment.

This page addresses adult conviction sealing under M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A, non-conviction sealing under M.G.L. c. 276, § 100C, and expungement under M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100E through 100U. Counsel reviews a current Massachusetts Criminal Offender Record Information report (CORI) and the docket for every case before preparing a petition. The Massachusetts sealing and expungement standards page sets out the judicial decisions in more detail. The CORI sealing and expungement FAQs answer common questions about particular dispositions.

Sealing and Expungement Do Different Things

Sealing limits access to a criminal record. Sealing does not erase the record. For applications for employment, housing, and occupational or professional licenses that ask about prior arrests, criminal-court appearances, or convictions, a person with a sealed Massachusetts record generally may answer “no record.” The Commissioner of Probation must report that no record exists, except to law enforcement agencies, courts, and, under § 100A, appointing authorities. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A; M.G.L. c. 276, § 100C.

A sealed record can remain available within the Massachusetts system for purposes authorized by statute or court rule. For example, § 100C permits access following a later guilty finding or verdict in the circumstances the statute identifies. The Supreme Judicial Court has also held that § 100C permits a defendant to obtain the defendant’s own automatically sealed acquittal record. The Supreme Judicial Court did not create a general right of access to records sealed to protect another person’s interests.

Gravito v. Commonwealth, No. SJC-13705 (Mass. Nov. 25, 2025). The firm’s analysis of the Gravito decision and sealed-record access explains the difference between a defendant’s access to the defendant’s own sealed record and access to records sealed to protect another person.

Expungement is substantially narrower. “Expunge” means the permanent erasure or destruction of a covered record so it is no longer maintained by, or accessible to, the court, criminal-justice agencies, or state, county, and municipal agencies. A record that contains information about another person may be retained only after the petitioner’s identifying information is permanently removed. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100E.

The statutory definition of an expungeable “record” excludes, among other things, information in the statewide domestic-violence record-keeping system, evaluative information, intelligence information, and nonidentifying statistical or analytical material. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100E. A Massachusetts expungement order also does not necessarily remove material independently maintained by federal agencies, private background-screening companies, news organizations, or other third parties.

The Massachusetts Terms for Clearing a Record

Massachusetts provides expungement and sealing. Annulment is the term used in several other states for the same subject. The New Hampshire statute is titled Annulment of Criminal Records. N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 651:5. The word “annulment” does not appear in the Massachusetts record statutes.

A request framed as an annulment is a petition to expunge or a petition to seal. Expungement is the permanent erasure or destruction of the record. M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100E through 100U. Sealing limits access to the record without erasing it.

M.G.L. c. 276, §§ 100A and 100C. The sections that follow set out the eligibility rules for sealing and for expungement. The Legislature wrote each waiting period and each expungement category. The page on what the Massachusetts Legislature decides in a criminal case covers the sealing and expungement statutes along with the other statutes that govern a criminal case.

Before Arraignment: Avoiding a CORI Entry

A complaint application ordinarily creates no CORI entry when no criminal complaint issues and no arraignment occurs. In eligible misdemeanor cases, an assistant clerk magistrate or the clerk magistrate conducts a private clerk-magistrate hearing before issuing a criminal complaint. No complaint, arraignment, or CORI entry results from an application that the clerk-magistrate denies.

A denial of the complaint application does not erase a police report, arrest record, fingerprint submission, school disciplinary record, licensing record, immigration record, or other agency record. Each agency applies its own rules for access to and correction of its records. A clerk-magistrate hearing is also not available in every case. See M.G.L. c. 218, § 35A.

The difference between a CORI entry and the police, arrest, and agency records that remain can affect college and university students, licensed professionals, and noncitizens whose applications may ask about arrests or charges, not merely convictions.

Sealing an Adult Conviction Under M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A

A person seeking to seal an eligible adult conviction submits a written request to the Commissioner of Probation under M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A. The Commissioner must seal the record of a person who satisfies the statutory requirements.

The principal waiting periods are listed below.

• Misdemeanor records. The waiting period is at least three years before the request, including any period of incarceration or custody.
• Felony records. The waiting period is at least seven years before the request, including any period of incarceration or custody.
• Sex offenses. The waiting period is at least fifteen years following disposition, including the end of supervision, probation, and incarceration, or for as long as a registration duty continues, whichever is longer. A person ever classified as a Level 2 or Level 3 sex offender may not seal a sex-offense record under § 100A.

A later Massachusetts conviction within the relevant three- or seven-year period prevents sealing, except for motor-vehicle offenses with a maximum penalty of no more than a $50 fine. The applicant must also certify that there have been no disqualifying out-of-state, federal, or territorial convictions or imprisonment during the relevant period. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A.

Later matters that end in a not-guilty finding, dismissal for want of prosecution, dismissal at the complainant’s request, nolle prosequi, or no bill do not interrupt the waiting period. Section 100A treats a conviction for violating a 209A abuse-prevention order or a 258E harassment-prevention order as a felony when calculating the waiting period. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A.

Convictions Excluded From § 100A Sealing

Section 100A does not apply to convictions under M.G.L. c. 140, §§ 121 through 131H, or to convictions under chapters 268 and 268A, except convictions for resisting arrest. Section 100A contains no additional general exclusion beyond the convictions it expressly lists. Eligibility nevertheless depends on every statutory requirement, including the disposition, applicable waiting period, subsequent record, and any offense-specific restriction. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100A.

OUI, Domestic-Violence, and Drug Convictions

An OUI conviction, a conviction under M.G.L. c. 265, § 13M, or an ordinary drug conviction is not categorically excluded from § 100A sealing. An otherwise eligible misdemeanor record is generally subject to the three-year period. An otherwise eligible felony record is generally subject to the seven-year period.

Sealing a criminal record does not alter a Registry of Motor Vehicles record, eliminate an immigration consequence, restore firearms eligibility, or control a separate professional-licensing record.

Sealing Dismissals and Other Non-Conviction Dispositions Under § 100C

M.G.L. c. 276, § 100C applies to specified non-conviction dispositions. Section 100C does not permit a court to shorten the waiting period for a conviction governed by § 100A.

A not-guilty finding, grand-jury no bill, or judicial finding of no probable cause must be sealed unless the defendant makes a written request not to seal the record. The Supreme Judicial Court has held that sealing of these dispositions is mandatory, not discretionary. Commonwealth v. J.F., 491 Mass. 824 (2023).

A person seeking to seal a dismissal or nolle prosequi must petition the court. The judge may order sealing when substantial justice would best be served. The petitioner must establish good cause after the judge balances the public interest in access against the petitioner’s privacy and reintegration interests. Commonwealth v. Pon, 469 Mass. 296 (2014).

Relevant considerations include the following.

• The particular disadvantage caused by the public availability of the record.
• Evidence of rehabilitation.
• The question whether sealing would alleviate the identified disadvantage.
• The person’s circumstances at the time of the offense.
• The time since the offense and disposition.
• The nature of, and reason for, the dismissal or nolle prosequi.

The petitioner must identify the claimed disadvantage with sufficient particularity and credibility. The disadvantage may be current or reasonably foreseeable. Commonwealth v. Pon, 469 Mass. 296 (2014).

A completed continuance without a finding (CWOF) or pretrial-probation disposition may end in dismissal. The matter remains pending during the continuance or probationary period. After dismissal, a person may seek discretionary sealing under § 100C without waiting three or seven years, but sealing is not automatic merely because the case was dismissed.

Time-Based Expungement Under §§ 100F Through 100J

Time-based expungement is available only when every statutory requirement is satisfied. The Commissioner of Probation certifies eligibility under M.G.L. c. 276, § 100I, while §§ 100F, 100G, and 100H prescribe procedures for juvenile adjudications, convictions, and non-conviction records.

The principal requirements include the following.

• Every offense covered by the petition must have occurred before the petitioner’s twenty-first birthday.
• The petitioner must wait at least three years after offenses involving only misdemeanors or at least seven years after offenses that include a felony. The calculation includes incarceration, custody, and probation.
• The petitioner may not have other Massachusetts criminal-court or juvenile-court appearances or dispositions, other than the records included in the petition and qualifying motor-vehicle offenses punishable by no more than a $50 fine.
• The petitioner may not have disqualifying criminal or juvenile appearances or dispositions in another state, United States possession, or federal court.
• The petitioner must certify that, to the petitioner’s knowledge, no criminal-justice agency is conducting an active criminal investigation of the petitioner.
• The petitioned offense must not be an offense that § 100J excludes.

Section 100I treats multiple offenses arising from the same incident as a single offense for eligibility purposes.

For a conviction record, the Commissioner determines statutory eligibility and then notifies the district attorney. The judge retains discretion to grant or deny an eligible petition in the best interests of justice and must enter written findings explaining the order. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100G.

Offenses Excluded From Time-Based Expungement

M.G.L. c. 276, § 100J excludes time-based expungement under §§ 100F, 100G, and 100H for numerous offenses. The excluded offenses include the following.

• Offenses resulting in death or serious bodily injury, or committed with intent to cause death or serious bodily injury.
• Offenses committed while armed with a dangerous weapon.
• Offenses against an elderly person or person with a disability.
• Specified sex offenses and sexually violent offenses.
• OUI offenses under M.G.L. c. 90, § 24.
• Specified firearms and weapons offenses.
• Violations of the protective orders identified in § 100J.
• Assault or assault and battery on a family or household member under M.G.L. c. 265, § 13M.
• Any felony offense under M.G.L. c. 265.

A misdemeanor assault or assault and battery charge under M.G.L. c. 265, § 13A is not categorically excluded by name, but it may fall within another excluded category. Eligibility therefore depends on the charged conduct, injury, weapon, victim, intent, and disposition, not the offense label alone.

The exclusions in § 100J apply to time-based expungement. Eligibility for sealing under § 100A or § 100C depends on the requirements of those sections, not on the § 100J exclusions.

Expungement for Error, Fraud, or Decriminalized Conduct Under § 100K

M.G.L. c. 276, § 100K provides a separate basis for expungement. The age, waiting-period, and offense-exclusion requirements in §§ 100I and 100J do not apply.

The petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the record resulted from any of the following.

• False identification or unauthorized use or theft of the petitioner’s identity.
• Conduct that is no longer criminal, unless the same elements remain criminal under another designation.
• Demonstrable error by law enforcement.
• Demonstrable error by a civilian or expert witness.
• Demonstrable error by a court employee.
• Demonstrable fraud upon the court.

A judge who finds that the petitioner proved a qualifying ground must still decide whether expungement serves the best interests of justice. The court must hold a hearing if the petitioner or district attorney requests one. A judge who orders expungement must enter written findings of fact. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100K.

Under Commonwealth v. K.W., 490 Mass. 619 (2022), a petitioner who proves a qualifying ground under § 100K(a) receives a strong presumption in favor of expungement. A judge who denies the petition because of a significant countervailing concern must identify that concern in written findings. The judge may not weigh the petitioner’s other criminal records, whether sealed or unsealed, against the petition. The presumption applies to reason-based expungement under § 100K. The presumption does not apply to time-based expungement under §§ 100F through 100J.

M.G.L. c. 276, § 100K 1/4 requires expungement of specified marijuana records and does not use the discretionary analysis that applies under § 100K.

Chapter 65 of the Acts of 2026 decriminalized simple possession through three ounces effective April 19, 2026. The Legislature did not add the new quantities to the enactments that § 100K 1/4 names. A record based on conduct that Chapter 65 decriminalized is therefore reviewed under § 100K(a)(2), which addresses an offense that is no longer a crime, together with the exact charge and disposition.

Employment, Licensing, Immigration, Firearms, and Federal Records

A sealed record generally permits a “no record” answer to the Massachusetts employment, housing, and occupational or professional licensing inquiries governed by §§ 100A and 100C. Licensing boards, federal agencies, security-clearance authorities, schools, and immigration agencies may ask different questions and apply different disclosure rules. Before answering, the applicant should read the exact question and the law or rule that authorizes it.

The question whether a disposition counts as a conviction for immigration purposes depends on federal immigration law, not on a Massachusetts sealing or expungement order. A noncitizen should obtain immigration advice before filing a petition or answering an application question. See immigration consequences of Massachusetts criminal charges.

Sealing does not itself restore firearms rights or resolve firearms-licensing eligibility. The person’s eligibility to possess firearms or obtain a Massachusetts firearms license depends on the exact disposition and current state and federal law. See Massachusetts firearms laws.

Massachusetts must transmit certain sealing and expungement information to the FBI when fingerprint information was submitted through the Interstate Identification Index and a sealing or expungement order includes a request that the FBI seal or expunge the corresponding federal entry. M.G.L. c. 22C, § 36; M.G.L. c. 276, § 100T.

A Massachusetts court cannot compel a federal agency or private entity to destroy an independently maintained record. A person whose FBI Identity History Summary misstates or omits the Massachusetts disposition must use the federal correction process to update the federal record. The firm’s page on Massachusetts sealing orders and federal criminal records explains that procedure.

Civil 209A Restraining Order and 258E Harassment Prevention Order Registry Records

A civil 209A abuse-prevention order or 258E harassment-prevention order is not part of the criminal record addressed by the sealing and expungement statutes. The statutory definition of a record subject to criminal-record expungement excludes information in the statewide domestic-violence record-keeping system. M.G.L. c. 276, § 100E.

A criminal prosecution for violating a 209A restraining order or a 258E harassment prevention order creates a criminal record governed by the applicable sealing or expungement statute. Removing the underlying civil order from the statewide registry requires a different petition and a different legal standard. See Expunging a Massachusetts 209A Restraining Order or 258E Harassment Prevention Order From the Registry.

Preparing the Correct Petition

Before filing, counsel obtains a current CORI and the docket and disposition documents for every relevant case. Counsel then confirms the following points.

1. The correct disposition for each charge.
2. The question whether the matter is a conviction, CWOF, dismissal, nolle prosequi, acquittal, no bill, or no-probable-cause finding.
3. The applicable waiting period and its correct start date.
4. Any Massachusetts, out-of-state, federal, or juvenile record affecting eligibility.
5. The question whether a particular offense is excluded from the requested sealing or expungement.
6. The evidence needed to establish a statutory ground or a particularized present or foreseeable disadvantage.

An otherwise viable petition may be denied if it seeks relief from the wrong decision-maker, misstates the disposition, overlooks another record, or applies an expungement exclusion to a sealing request.

The firm’s guide to how Massachusetts judges decide sealing and expungement petitions explains how judges apply the sealing and expungement standards to the evidence submitted with each petition.

The Office or Court for Each Petition

A person seeking to seal an eligible conviction submits the § 100A request to the Commissioner of Probation on the Commissioner’s current form. A person files a § 100C petition to seal a dismissal or nolle prosequi in the court that handled the case. The Commissioner first reviews a time-based expungement petition for eligibility. A petition for a qualifying record proceeds under § 100F, § 100G, or § 100H, depending on whether the record is a juvenile adjudication, conviction, or non-conviction record. A person files a § 100K petition in the court that created the record.

Serpa Law Office handles sealing and expungement matters arising from the Boston Municipal Court, Quincy District Court, and other Massachusetts District Court and Municipal Court divisions. A petition involving a Superior Court case is generally filed in the appropriate Superior Court.

How Serpa Law Office Handles Record-Sealing and Expungement Matters

Attorney Joe Serpa begins with the current CORI, docket, and disposition documents. He determines whether the client qualifies for sealing or expungement, identifies the correct filing procedure, prepares the petition and supporting evidence, and addresses any related employment, housing, licensing, immigration, firearms, or federal-record question.

Representation can begin before a criminal complaint issues. In an eligible case, counsel may be able to prevent arraignment and the resulting CORI entry. The firm’s page on how Massachusetts criminal cases can be dismissed or stopped before trial explains why a prearraignment resolution differs from a later dismissal.

Frequently Asked Questions About Sealing and Expunging a Massachusetts Criminal Record

To discuss a Massachusetts CORI, sealing petition, or expungement petition, call 617.936.0201 or contact Serpa Law Office for a free consultation.