District of Columbia
DC Court Records: How to Use eAccess, and DC's Two Separate Relief Tracks
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 10, 2026). · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

The District of Columbia's court records search, eAccess, is unusually fast by court-portal standards. Docket information and document images are typically available within minutes of being entered or scanned, not the next business day. The tradeoff is that it is demanding about exactly how you search it.
DC also runs two genuinely separate legal tracks for hiding a criminal record from public view, expungement and sealing, and the difference between them matters for anyone trying to understand what a cleared DC record actually shows.
Information last verified on 2026-08-10. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.
This guide is part of a broader look at court records by state. For the general mechanics of federal versus state versus county searches, see how to look up court records and are court records public.
eAccess: Fast, But Exact
DC Superior Court's eAccess replaced the older, docket-only Court Cases Online tool, and its defining feature is speed. The court system describes docket information and document images as available within minutes of being input or scanned, a near-real-time standard that most state portals do not match; many disclose an update lag of hours or days instead.
That speed comes with a strict input requirement. Case numbers have to be entered in the exact format the court uses, including spacing and leading zeroes, for example a case informally called 17ADM1 has to be entered as 2017 ADM 000001. Name-based searches carry their own quirks: entering a date of death alongside a name search returns results only for probate cases, while entering a date of birth returns results only for criminal cases. Getting these formatting details wrong is the most common reason a real case does not show up in a search.
eAccess search itself is gated by a CAPTCHA step. The court's own disclaimer is direct about the limits of what you get back: the system does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, legality, reliability, or content of the information. Criminal-case online payments were removed from eAccess effective May 7, 2021; that function moved elsewhere.
Federal Cases: Not on eAccess
DC hosts federal courts, including the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and those cases are not part of eAccess at all. Federal case records in DC live on PACER, the nationwide federal court records system, which charges $0.10 per page with a $3.00 cap per document (transcripts are uncapped) and offers a fee waiver for anyone who accrues $30 or less in charges per quarter.

Certified Copies
This guide does not publish a specific DC certified-copy fee figure, since exact current pricing was not confirmed from a primary source in this session. Requests generally go to the Clerk's Office at the Moultrie Courthouse; confirm current fees and submission methods (email, mail, or in person) directly with the court.
Two Separate Tracks: Expungement and Sealing
DC Code Title 16, Chapter 8 sets up expungement and sealing as two distinct, parallel mechanisms within the same chapter, not two names for the same thing, and confusing them will give a reader the wrong picture of what a DC record shows.

Expungement, covered in Sections 16-802 through 16-804, applies to a specific, narrower category: offenses that have since been decriminalized, legalized, or held unconstitutional, and simple marijuana possession from before February 15, 2015, once the case reached a final disposition and prosecutors do not move to retain the record. Expungement's stated purpose, from Section 16-804, is to restore a person, in the contemplation of law, to the status they occupied before being cited, arrested, charged, or convicted. The same section gives real teeth to that restoration: no person whose record has been expunged shall be held guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of failing to acknowledge or disclose that citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, or conviction. In practice, that means a person with an expunged DC record may lawfully decline to disclose it, even under oath. Automatic expungement under the statute must occur by October 1, 2027, or within 90 days after the case is terminated or reaches final disposition, whichever is later.
Sealing, covered in Sections 16-805 through 16-807, is broader in the cases it reaches. Automatic sealing applies to cases the prosecutor terminated without a conviction, or that ended in acquittal, and to misdemeanor convictions once at least 10 years have passed since the sentence was completed. Certain categories are excluded from automatic sealing, including intrafamily offenses, sex offenses, and DUI-related cases. The same October 1, 2027, or 90-day deadline applies to automatic sealing.
Sealing carries the same protection against a perjury charge that expungement does. Section 16-807(b) states that no person granted criminal record sealing relief shall be held guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of failure to recite, acknowledge, or disclose that citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, disposition, or conviction, in response to any inquiry made for any purpose. That is the same protection Section 16-804(b) gives to an expunged record, so on the question most readers care about, whether you have to disclose, the two tracks land in the same place.
The genuine difference is what happens to the record's legal status and who can still reach it. Section 16-804 describes expungement's effect as restoring the person, in the contemplation of law, to the status they held before the citation or arrest. Section 16-807(a) describes sealing's effect more narrowly: it removes the records from public view and permits restricted, nonpublic access by specific parties for specific purposes. Both tracks let the Clerk and the agencies keep a nonpublic, restricted-access file and answer public inquiries by saying no records are available, but the purposes for which a sealed file can be opened are a longer list than the expungement one, and Section 16-807 expressly includes employment decisions, sex offender and gun offender registration, and determining whether a later offense counts as a second or subsequent one.
Those dates describe what DC Code provides, not necessarily what is currently operating. DC Code's own applicability notes attached to Sections 16-802 and 16-805 state that the automatic-expungement and automatic-sealing amendments enacted by Section 101(b) of D.C. Law 24-284 are subject to the inclusion of the law's fiscal effect in an approved budget and financial plan, and they say directly that those amendments have not been implemented. That is the same kind of budget-contingency gap this guide flags for Clean Slate-style automatic relief in states like Connecticut and Oklahoma: the mechanism is enacted law, but confirming it is actually running as of a given date takes checking current funding status with DC Courts or the DC Council, not just reading the statute's stated deadline.
For eligibility detail and the filing process for records that fall outside the automatic tracks, see DC expungement laws, which this guide does not duplicate.
Using DC Court Records the Right Way
eAccess is built for checking a specific case, whether it is your own or one you have a legitimate reason to look into, not for compiling a background file on someone else. If a DC court record is used to screen a job applicant or a tenant, that use is governed separately by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1681c, a criminal conviction is exempt from the standard seven-year reporting window that applies to most arrests and civil judgments, meaning it can be reported indefinitely unless it has been expunged or sealed under DC law.
Related Resources
Court Records by State covers the full 50-state picture. See also How to Look Up Court Records, Are Court Records Public?, DC Expungement Laws, DC Background Check Laws, DC Warrant Search, and DC Public Records Laws.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information about DC's eAccess system and its two record-relief tracks, expungement and sealing. It is not legal advice. Portal features and statutes change; verify current details with DC Courts or a licensed DC attorney before relying on anything here for a specific situation.

Last updated: 2026-08-10. Portal facts and fees reflect their published status as of August 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions
How current is DC's eAccess court records search?
Very. Docket information and document images are typically available within minutes of being entered or scanned, faster than most state portals.
Why can't I find a case on eAccess?
The most common reason is case number format. eAccess requires the exact case number and spacing, including leading zeroes, for example 2017 ADM 000001 rather than a shortened version like 17ADM1.
Are federal cases in DC on eAccess?
No. Federal cases, including those in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, are on PACER, the separate federal court records system, not eAccess.
What is the difference between expungement and sealing in DC?
Expungement applies to a narrower set of cases (decriminalized or unconstitutional offenses, and pre-2015 marijuana possession) and restores the person, in the contemplation of law, to the status they held before the citation or arrest. Sealing applies more broadly (non-conviction cases and misdemeanor convictions after a 10-year wait) and removes the records from public view while permitting restricted, nonpublic access by specific parties. Both carry the same protection: under Sections 16-804(b) and 16-807(b), a person cannot be held guilty of perjury or of giving a false statement for failing to disclose an expunged or sealed record.
Do I have to disclose a sealed DC record?
Section 16-807(b) says a person granted sealing relief cannot be held guilty of perjury or of giving a false statement for failing to recite, acknowledge, or disclose the citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, disposition, or conviction in response to any inquiry made for any purpose. That is the same protection expungement carries under Section 16-804(b). The record still exists in a restricted, nonpublic file that specific parties can reach for specific purposes.
Is DC's expungement or sealing automatic?
For the categories the statute defines, that is what DC Code provides: an October 1, 2027, or 90-day deadline for automatic expungement and automatic sealing of eligible cases. But DC Code's own applicability notes say the amendment creating that automatic mechanism is subject to budget funding and has not been implemented, so confirm current status with DC Courts before assuming a specific case has already been handled automatically.
Can I use a DC court record to screen a job applicant or tenant?
Not on its own. Employment and tenant screening are separately governed by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Updates
Corrected the comparison of DC expungement and sealing: DC Code § 16-807(b) gives sealed records the same protection against a perjury or false-statement charge that expungement carries, so the page no longer states that only expungement lets a person decline to disclose the record.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Code of the District of Columbia, Title 16: Particular Actions, Proceedings and Matters. - Chapter 8
§ 16-807Effect of sealing of criminal records.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) The effect of criminal record sealing shall be to remove all records related to a citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, disposition, or conviction from public view and to permit restricted, nonpublic access by specific parties for specific purposes. (b) No person as to whom criminal record sealing relief has been granted shall be held thereafter under any provision of law to be guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of failure to recite or acknowledge or disclose that citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, disposition, or conviction, in response to any inquiry made of them for any purpose.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at github.com
Also relied on in: District of Columbia Expungement and Record Sealing Laws (2025)
§ 16-802Automatic expungement of criminal records.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) The Court shall order automatic expungement of all criminal records and court proceedings related only to citations, arrests, charges, or convictions for the commission of a criminal offense that has subsequently been decriminalized, legalized, or held to be unconstitutional by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia or the Supreme Court of the United States, or records related only to simple possession for any quantity of marijuana in violation of § 48-904.01(d)(1) before February 15, 2015, if: (1) The case was terminated by the prosecutor or otherwise reached a final disposition; and (2) The prosecutor has not: (A) Filed a written motion, which may be made ex parte, to: (i) Retain and sequester the record for a limited period of time; or (ii) Contest that a particular person qualifies for expungement under this section; and (B) Demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that: (i) Retention is necessary for a lawful purpose, such as: (I) Investigating, prosecuting, or defending another criminal case; (II) Complying with disclosure obligations in another criminal case; or (III) Determining the person's suitability for diversion, release, sentencing…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-01 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at github.com
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- LEVI M. RUFFIN v. UNITED STATES (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2016, 135 A.3d 799)“…uffin moved the trial court to seal his arrest records, see D.C. Code § 16-802 (2012 Repl.), issue a certificate of in…”
- Jose I. Zalmeron v. United States (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2015, 125 A.3d 341)“…determination that person must register as a sex offender); D.C. Code § 16-802 (c)-(d) (motion to seal record based on…”
- Williams v. United States (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2025)“…onviction also may not seal the fact of their arrest under D.C. Code § 16-802(a), which allows record sealing only u…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: District of Columbia Background Check Laws (2026 Guide)
§ 16-804Effect of expungement of criminal records.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) The effect of expungement shall be to restore a person, in the contemplation of the law, to the status they occupied before being cited, arrested, charged, or convicted. (b) No person as to whom criminal record expungement relief has been granted shall be held thereafter under any provision of law to be guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of failure to acknowledge or disclose that citation, arrest, charge, prosecution, disposition, or conviction, in response to any inquiry made of them for any purpose.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at github.com
§ 16-805Automatic sealing of criminal records.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter and in subsection (b) of this section, the Court shall order automatic sealing of all criminal records and court proceedings related to: (1) Citations, arrests, or charges for the commission of a criminal offense; provided, that the case was terminated by the prosecutor or otherwise reached a final disposition and did not result in a conviction or acquittal pursuant to § 24-501; and (2) Citations, arrests, charges, and convictions for the commission of a misdemeanor offense that resulted in a conviction; provided, that a waiting period of at least 10 years has elapsed since completion of the sentence.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at github.com
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- John Larracuente v. United States (District of Columbia Court of Appeals 2019, 211 A.3d 1140)“…Affirmed. 13 D.C. Code § 16-805(a) (2018). 14 Because w…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 15
§ 1681cRequirements relating to information contained in consumer reportsIn forcecited in 54 of our articles
Except as authorized under subsection (b), no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: Cases under title 11 or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years. Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period. Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years. Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years. Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 383 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Katz v. Donna Karan Co. (2017) addressed the FACTA truncation rule in 1681c(g) and affirmed dismissal for lack of Article III standing, treating material risk of harm as a fact question. Edward Seamans v. Temple University (2014) held the seven-year window in 1681c(a)(4) is extended for an education loan only until that loan is repaid.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Katz v. Donna Karan Co. (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2017, 872 F.3d 114)✓A shopper sued two stores whose receipts printed the first six digits of his credit card number; the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal for lack of standing, seeing no clear error in the finding that those digits show only the card issuer, not a material risk of identity theft.
- Edward Seamans v. Temple University (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2014, 744 F.3d 853)✓A defaulted university loan kept appearing on a borrower's credit reports after he repaid it because the school never reported the delinquency date; the Third Circuit held the Higher Education Act suspends section 1681c(a)(4)'s aging-off rule only until repayment.
- Gonzales v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2011, 660 F.3d 1055)✓A debt buyer offered to settle health club debts over seven years old, saying that if it was reporting the account the bureaus would be told it was settled; the Ninth Circuit, treating those debts as unreportable under section 1681c(a)(4), called that implication misleading.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How Long Does a Felony Stay on Your Record? (2026), Alabama Background Check Laws (2026 Guide), Louisiana Background Check Laws (2026 Guide)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- DC Courts, eAccess(eaccess.dccourts.gov).gov
- Council of the District of Columbia, DC Code Title 16, Chapter 8, Criminal Record Sealing and Expungement(code.dccouncil.gov).gov
- Council of the District of Columbia, DC Code § 16-804, Effect of expungement(code.dccouncil.gov).gov
- Council of the District of Columbia, DC Code § 16-802, Expungement of certain criminal records (applicability note: amendment subject to budget and financial plan, not implemented)(code.dccouncil.gov).gov
- Council of the District of Columbia, DC Code § 16-805, Sealing of certain criminal records (applicability note: amendment subject to budget and financial plan, not implemented)(code.dccouncil.gov).gov
- Cornell Legal Information Institute, 15 U.S.C. § 1681c, Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports(law.cornell.edu)
- Council of the District of Columbia, DC Code § 16-807, Effect of sealing of criminal records(code.dccouncil.gov)