Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36863286›Full record

ArticleThe International journal on drug policy2023

Clearing cannabis criminal records: A survey of criminal record expungement availability and accessibility among US States and Washington DC that decriminalized or legalized cannabis.

Tanner Wakefield, Stella Bialous, Dorie E Apollonio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The International journal on drug policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tanner WakefieldCenter for Tobacco Control Research and Education, School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366 Library, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. Electronic address: tanner.wakefield@ucsf.edu.
Stella BialousSchool of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366 Library, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Dorie E ApollonioDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 366 Library, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.

Funding

Effect of Tobacco Advocacy at the State LevelR01DA043950 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI APOLLONIO, DOROTHY ELINOR · 2016 to 2020
$2.6M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA043950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2022, despite expanding state-level legalization, cannabis remained illegal at the federal level, driving drug offenses, and contact with the justice system. Cannabis criminalization disproportionately impacts minorities, and criminal records carry negative economic, health, and social consequences. Legalization prevents future criminalization but fails to assist existing record-holders. We surveyed 39 states and Washington DC where cannabis was decriminalized or legalized to determine record expungement availability and accessibility for cannabis offenders.

methodsWe performed a retrospective, qualitative survey of state expungement laws allowing record sealing or record destruction where cannabis use was decriminalized or legalized. Statutes were collected between February 25, 2021, and August 25, 2022, from state websites or NexisUni. We collected pardon information for two states from online state government resources. Materials were coded in Atlas.ti to determine if states had general, cannabis, and other drug conviction expungement regimes, petitions, or automated systems, waiting periods, and financial requirements. Codes were developed via inductive and iterative coding of materials.

resultsAmong places surveyed, 36 provided any conviction expungement, 34 provided general relief, 21 offered cannabis-specific relief, and 11 offered general drug relief, nonexclusively. Most states used petitions. Thirty-three general and 7 cannabis-specific programs required waiting periods. Nineteen general and 4 cannabis programs imposed administrative fees, and 16 general and one cannabis-specific program required legal financial obligations to be paid.

conclusionAmong the 39 states and Washington DC that decriminalized or legalized cannabis and offered expungement, more states relied on general rather than cannabis-specific systems, and the majority of these required record holders to petition for relief and imposed waiting periods and financial requirements. Research is needed to determine if automating expungement, reducing or eliminating waiting periods, and eliminating financial requirements may expand record relief for former cannabis offenders.

Indexed as

CannabisCriminalsHallucinogensMedical MarijuanaCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsHumansRetrospective StudiesCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsHallucinogensMedical MarijuanaCannabisCriminal justiceExpungementPublic healthSocial justice

Identifiers

PMID36863286
PMCPMC12502637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.