Can a DUI be expunged?

Several different legal remedies get advertised under one word, they do different things to a record, and short of a pardon in Texas, or Florida's petition for victims of human trafficking, none of them erases a DUI conviction in any of the ten states on this page. Five exclude it from their sealing or expungement law, and three of those name the DUI statute, or the article it sits in, in the text of the exclusion.

Four remedies, four different things

Before any state-by-state answer is useful, the words have to mean something. They are used loosely in advertising and precisely in statutes, and the precise versions are:

Expungement

The record is destroyed or removed. Some statutes that use the word are closer to sealing. Minnesota says so outright: section 609A.01 limits the remedy to sealing and says nothing in the chapter authorizes destroying a record. Texas uses the word for cases that never produced a final conviction, and for pardons.

Sealing, record restriction or nondisclosure

The record continues to exist but is withheld from most public and private searches. Courts, law enforcement and specified licensing bodies keep access. Georgia provides this and excludes impaired driving from it; Colorado excludes it and then lets it back in by exception; Arizona provides it for a DUI, Minnesota only by petition; Texas's order of nondisclosure is the same idea under another name.

Set aside

The judgment of guilt is set aside and the person is released from the penalties and disabilities flowing from the conviction. The conviction itself stays, visibly. This is Arizona's remedy under section 13-905.

Dismissal after probation

The plea is withdrawn and a not-guilty plea entered, or after a trial the guilty verdict set aside, and the accusation dismissed — after which the statute may still permit the conviction to be used for specified purposes. This is California's Penal Code section 1203.4.

The difference that matters to most people is not philosophical. It is whether the case still counts as a prior if there is a next one, and whether it has to be disclosed. On the first question, every relief statute on this page that addresses it gives the same answer; that is the section below the table.

What each state actually offers

The five states that say no

Georgia restricts records under section 35-3-37, and the exclusion list at subsection (j)(4)(B) contains “any serious traffic offense in violation of Article 15 of Chapter 6 of Title 40”. That is the article the DUI statute sits in.

Washington lets misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor convictions be vacated under RCW 9.96.060, subject to a list of exclusions, and subsection (2)(d) takes out “a violation of RCW 46.61.502 (driving while under the influence), 46.61.504 (actual physical control while under the influence)” by number.

Virginia's sealing-by-petition statute, section 19.2-392.12, lists the offenses it does not reach, and subsection (L)(1) names sections 18.2-266, 18.2-266.1 and 18.2-268.3 — DUI, DUI under 21, and an unreasonable refusal — among the offenses ineligible for sealing by petition. None of the three is on the automatic-sealing list in section 19.2-392.6(A) either.

South Carolina's expungement statute for minor convictions, section 22-5-910(A), ends with one sentence: “this section does not apply to an offense involving the operation of a motor vehicle.” The route around a conviction is closed too. Section 17-22-50(A)(2) says a person charged with driving under the influence or with an unlawful alcohol concentration must not be considered for pretrial intervention.

Florida reaches the same result without naming DUI in its records law. Its sealing statute, section 943.059(1)(c), requires that the person “has not been adjudicated guilty” of the acts stemming from the arrest, and section 316.656(1) says that no court may suspend, defer or withhold adjudication of guilt for a violation of section 316.193. Every Florida DUI conviction is therefore an adjudication of guilt, and outside sealing by construction. The one route that ignores the disposition is section 943.0583(3), for offenses committed as part of a human trafficking scheme against the person petitioning.

The five states that offer something less than the word

California. Section 1203.4 is real relief, but for a DUI it is not automatic. Subdivision (c)(1) takes the offenses described in subdivisions (a) to (e) of Vehicle Code section 12810 out of the ordinary rule — a section 23152 DUI is in (b), reckless driving in (c) — and (c)(2) lets the court grant the relief anyway “in its discretion and in the interest of justice”. The section is also explicit about its own limits, in several places; two matter most here. The conviction “may be pleaded and proved” in any subsequent prosecution “and shall have the same effect as if probation had not been granted”, so a dismissed DUI remains a prior. And the relief is granted “except as provided in Section 13555 of the Vehicle Code”, which preserves the DMV's action against the license.

Colorado has a broad sealing provision at section 24-72-706 and then a list of what it does not apply to. Item (2)(a)(III) is “a conviction for a violation of section 42-4-1301 (1) or (2)” — DUI, DWAI and DUI per se, by section number, each of which section 42-4-1301 makes a misdemeanor. Then subsection (2)(b) opens a door: a misdemeanor made ineligible by that list “is eligible for sealing” if the district attorney consents, or if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner's need is significant and substantial, that enough time has passed that the petitioner is no longer a threat to public safety, and that public disclosure is no longer necessary. A DUI is not one of the classed offenses in subsection (1)(b)(I) to (III), so the general clock in (1)(b)(IV) applies: five years after the later of final disposition or release from supervision.

Arizona has two remedies and both reach a DUI. Under section 13-905 a person may apply after discharge, and if the court grants it the judgment is set aside and the person released from the penalties and disabilities of the conviction, except, among a few others, license actions by the Department of Transportation under the sections listed in 13-905(D)(1). Section 13-911 seals the case records on a separate petition, three years after discharge for a class 1 misdemeanor, which is what section 28-1381(C) makes a DUI. Neither removes the conviction as a prior: section 13-905(E) says a set-aside conviction may be “used as a prior conviction”, and section 13-911(B)(5) says sealed records may be used to enhance the sentence under the DUI statutes, 28-1381 and 28-1382, by name.

Texas expunges a conviction only after a pardon or relief granted on the basis of actual innocence, under articles 55A.003 and 55A.004 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; its other expunction routes are for charges that never became a final conviction and, under article 55A.051(3), had no court-ordered community supervision — which shuts out a DWI dismissed after deferred adjudication. What a DWI can get instead is an order of nondisclosure, which bars criminal justice agencies from disclosing the record to the public. There are three routes. Deferred adjudication, which article 42A.102(b)(1)(B) rules out where the defendant held a commercial driver's license or commercial learner's permit or the alcohol concentration was 0.15 or more, leads to one under Government Code section 411.0726. A conviction followed by community supervision leads to one under section 411.0731, and a conviction followed by a sentence under section 411.0736; both of those exclude the 0.15 offense in Penal Code section 49.04(d). In all three, the person must have no earlier conviction or deferred adjudication other than a fine-only traffic offense, and the order is refused if the state shows the offense caused a collision involving another person.

Minnesota lists fourth-, third- and second-degree DWI among the convictions that are not expunged automatically, in section 609A.015, subdivision 3(b). For a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor, a petition is still possible under section 609A.02, subdivision 3, two years after discharge of a misdemeanor sentence or three after a gross misdemeanor, without a new conviction. Section 609A.03, subdivision 5(a) calls a conviction expungement “an extraordinary remedy”, granted only on clear and convincing evidence that the benefit to the petitioner is commensurate with the disadvantages to the public.

How long before a DUI can be sealed

Texas, Arizona, Minnesota and Colorado set a clock for a conviction, and each starts it at the end of the case or the sentence, not at the arrest. California's dismissal has no clock of its own.

• Texas: two years after community supervision ends, or three after a sentence is completed, if a condition kept the person on an interlock for at least six months; five years if no such condition was ordered. Sections 411.0731(f) and 411.0736(f).
• Arizona: the set aside can be asked for on discharge. Sealing waits three years after discharge for a class 1 misdemeanor, under section 13-911(E)(3).
• Minnesota: two years after discharge for a misdemeanor, three for a gross misdemeanor, with no new conviction in between. Section 609A.02, subdivision 3(a)(3) and (4).
• Colorado: five years after the later of final disposition or release from supervision, under section 24-72-706(1)(b)(IV) — and then only through the exception in (2)(b).
• California: section 1203.4 is asked for at the end of probation, or earlier if the person is discharged from probation early, rather than after a waiting period.

The other five have nothing to wait for. Washington is the one partial exception, and it is a trap rather than a door: see the reduced-charge section below.

The next DUI still counts

In four of the five states that offer relief, the statute that grants it also keeps the record available if there is a later impaired-driving case. (Colorado's sealing section was not read for this question.)

• California: the dismissed conviction “may be pleaded and proved” in a later prosecution, section 1203.4(a)(1).
• Arizona: section 13-905(E)(3) for a set aside, and section 13-911(B)(5) for sealing, which names the DUI enhancement statutes.
• Texas: Penal Code section 49.09(g) treats deferred adjudication for DWI as a conviction for enhancement purposes, and Government Code section 411.0775 says a nondisclosed conviction may be admitted at the trial of a later offense or disclosed to a prosecutor.
• Minnesota: section 609A.03, subdivision 7a(b)(1) lets an expunged record be opened and used between criminal justice agencies for prosecution and sentencing without a court order.

Why this is a question for the beginning of a case, not the end

Most exclusions above are written by section number or by offense category. That has one practical consequence: a case that resolves under a different section can fall outside the exclusion, and the moment that decides it is the moment the charge is resolved. It does not always work, and the statutes say where it does not.

A Colorado plea to reckless driving is still a misdemeanor traffic offense — section 42-4-1401(2) makes it a class 2 one — so item (2)(a)(I) excludes it just as (III) excludes the DUI, and it reaches sealing only through the same exception in (2)(b). A California reckless driving conviction is listed in Vehicle Code section 12810(c), so it sits under the same discretionary rule in Penal Code section 1203.4(c) as the DUI. A Georgia case that ends outside Article 15 of Chapter 6 of Title 40 is not a serious traffic offense for restriction purposes. A Florida case that ends as reckless driving is not a violation of section 316.193, so section 316.656(1) does not apply to it and the ordinary sealing rules do — although section 316.656(2)(a) forbids a judge from accepting a plea of guilty to a lesser offense where a breath or blood test showed 0.15 percent or more, which closes that route in the highest-reading cases.

Washington is written differently, and it is the reason to read the statute rather than assume. RCW 46.61.5055(14)(a)(xii) counts a conviction for reckless driving, negligent driving in the first degree or reckless endangerment as a “prior offense” when the charge was originally filed as a DUI or physical control. RCW 9.96.060(2)(d) then refuses to vacate a prior offense until ten years have passed since the arrest, and not at all if there was another alcohol or drug violation within those ten years. The reduced plea helps; it does not reset the clock.

In Texas the deciding moment is earlier still. Whether deferred adjudication is on the table at all depends on the reading and the license at the time of the offense, under article 42A.102(b)(1)(B).

If the charge was dismissed

Everything above is about convictions. A case that ended without one is a different question with a much better answer, and these are the routes the statutes read for this page provide:

• Arizona: section 13-911(A)(2) lets the records be sealed where the charge was dismissed or ended in a not-guilty verdict.
• Minnesota: section 609A.015, subdivision 1(a)(1) makes a person eligible for expungement without a petition where all charges were dismissed after a case was filed.
• Texas: an acquittal is expunged under article 55A.002. Otherwise, article 55A.051 limits the dismissed-charge routes to a charge that did not result in a final conviction, is no longer pending, and had no court-ordered community supervision other than for a Class C misdemeanor.
• Virginia: section 19.2-392.2(A) lets a person who was acquitted, or whose charge was dismissed or dropped by nolle prosequi, petition to expunge the police and court records. A rewritten version taking effect on December 1, 2026 covers any charge that did not end in a conviction, unless facts sufficient for guilt were stipulated or found and the case deferred.

What you still have to disclose

This is the part worth being careful about, because getting it wrong can be worse than the original conviction. The remedies answer it differently, and some of them answer it in terms.

California's section 1203.4 states that the order “does not relieve them of the obligation to disclose the conviction in response to any” question in the categories the statute goes on to list. Arizona's set aside leaves the conviction visible. Arizona sealing goes the other way: section 13-911(I)(5) lets the person state that they were never arrested for, charged with or convicted of the crime — except in listed situations, one of which, in (I)(5)(f), is a DUI record when applying for a job that involves operating a motor vehicle. Texas section 411.0755 says a person with an order of nondisclosure need not state the proceeding in an application for employment, information or licensing, while section 411.0765(b) lists the boards and employers that can still see it, the State Bar and the Texas Medical Board among them.

What the form asks, and what your state's statute permits you to answer, is a question for a lawyer licensed where the conviction happened. It is not one a national page can answer, and this one is not trying to.

Common questions