Yes, but through one narrow door, and if you do not fit through it there is no second route. That last part is the piece almost every article on this subject leaves out, and it is the one that matters most.
Two different statutes, and only one applies to you
Missouri has a general expungement statute, § 610.140 RSMo, which covers most misdemeanors and felonies. It does not cover DWI. Section 610.140.3 excludes:
- § 610.140.3(7) — “Any offense eligible for expungement under section 610.130”
- § 610.140.3(8) — “Any intoxication-related traffic or boating offense as defined in section 577.001…”
Read those two together carefully, because the second one is doing quiet work. Exclusion (8) is categorical. It does not say “offenses eligible under 610.130” — it says intoxication-related offenses, full stop.
So a DWI that fails the § 610.130 test — a felony DWI, a second offense, a CDL holder — cannot fall back on § 610.140. There is no alternative path. That conviction stays.
What Section 610.130 requires
Section 610.130.1 sets it out:
“After a period of not less than ten years, an individual who has pleaded guilty or has been convicted for a first intoxication-related traffic offense or intoxication-related boating offense which is a misdemeanor or a county or city ordinance violation and which is not a conviction for driving a commercial motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and who since such date has not been convicted of any intoxication-related traffic offense or intoxication-related boating offense may apply…”
Every clause in that sentence is a filter:
| Requirement | What it rules out |
|---|---|
| At least ten years | Anything more recent |
| First offense | Any second or subsequent DWI |
| Misdemeanor or city/county ordinance | Felony DWI |
| Not a commercial vehicle DWI | CDL-related offenses |
| No intervening intoxication-related conviction | Anyone who reoffended in the ten years |
Note it also covers boating offenses. Missouri treats a BWI the same way here, which surprises people.
The trap: “enforcement contacts” are broader than convictions
Section 610.130.2 adds a requirement that catches people who are otherwise clean. The court must find the person:
- has not been convicted of any subsequent intoxication-related traffic or boating offense, and
- has no other subsequent alcohol-related enforcement contacts as defined in section 302.525, and
- has nothing of that kind pending at the time of the hearing.
An alcohol-related enforcement contact under § 302.525 is not the same as a conviction. An administrative licence suspension is one — the Department of Revenue action that runs separately from the criminal case.
So this happens: someone is arrested for DWI in year six, the criminal charge is dismissed, they consider themselves clean, and their petition fails anyway because the administrative suspension is an enforcement contact. A dismissal in court does not erase it. We wrote about how those two proceedings run separately in getting your Missouri license back after a DWI suspension.
If you hold a CDL, you are barred twice
Section 610.130.4:
“The provisions of this section shall not apply to any individual who has been issued a commercial driver’s license or is required to possess a commercial driver’s license issued by this state or any other state.”
Two things to notice. It turns on holding or being required to hold a CDL — not on what vehicle you were driving. And it says any other state.
Then § 610.140.3(10) closes the other door, excluding from general expungement any motor vehicle law or ordinance violation committed by someone who holds or is required to hold a CDL. Not just DWI — any of them.
For a commercial driver that is a complete bar on both routes. It is the same logic that makes a routine ticket so serious for a CDL holder, which we covered in why a commercial driver can’t just pay the fine.
Once. Ever.
Section 610.130.3: “A person shall only be entitled to one expungement pursuant to this section.” The Director of Revenue keeps records specifically to enforce that, even after the expungement is granted.
One respect in which this is better than general expungement
Section 610.130.2 says that once the court makes the required findings, it shall enter the order. There is no discretionary balancing.
Compare § 610.140.6, where the court weighs whether your habits and conduct show you are not a threat to public safety and whether expungement serves the public welfare. Under § 610.130 the criteria are objective. Meet them and the order follows. That makes it a cleaner proceeding — the whole fight is eligibility, not persuasion.
What the order actually does
Section 610.130.3 restores you “to the status he or she occupied prior to such arrest, plea or conviction and as if such event had never taken place.”
And specifically: no person with such an order “shall be held thereafter under any provision of any law to be guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of his or her failure to recite or acknowledge such arrest, plea, trial, conviction or expungement.”
In plain language — you can answer no. Records become confidential, available only to the parties or by court order for good cause.
Frequently asked questions
Ten years from what?
The statute says “after a period of not less than ten years” and its only reference point is the guilty plea or conviction. If your ten years is close, that is a date to confirm against the actual court record rather than memory.
My DWI was a city ordinance violation, not a state charge. Does that count?
Yes — the statute expressly includes a county or city ordinance violation.
What if I had a DWI and, years later, a drug possession charge?
The drug charge does not disqualify the DWI under § 610.130, which looks only at intoxication-related traffic and boating offenses and alcohol-related enforcement contacts. The drug conviction would be considered separately under § 610.140 on its own timeline.
Does an expunged DWI still count as a prior if I am charged again?
This is the question to ask a lawyer about your specific record rather than take a general answer on. Enhancement provisions and expungement do not always interact the way people expect, and getting it wrong is expensive.
Can I file myself?
You can. The risk here is not paperwork, it is eligibility — and because you only get one, filing on a record that turns out to have an enforcement contact you had forgotten is a genuinely costly mistake.
Free consultation
Troy J. Leavitt has defended DWI cases in Jackson, Clay and Lafayette counties for more than 25 years, including time as a prosecutor who charged them. Consultations on criminal matters are free. If your DWI is coming up on ten years, a short conversation will tell you whether the enforcement-contact rule is going to be a problem before you spend anything.
Read more about Missouri expungement, DWI and DUI defense, and who qualifies for general expungement. Call (816) 228-6000 or contact the firm.
This article is general information about Missouri law, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Statutes cited: §§ 610.130 and 610.140 RSMo; alcohol-related enforcement contacts as defined in § 302.525 RSMo.
