Stowe v. Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, [Ms. 2160313, Aug. 18, 2017] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2017). In this unanimous decision by Judge Donaldson (Thomson, P.J., and Pittman, Thomas, and Moore, JJ., concur), the court affirms the circuit court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of this action seeking to purge alleged inaccurate information from the plaintiff’s pre-sentence investigation report included within the record of his conviction and relied upon by the Board of Pardons and Paroles and Department of Corrections for classification purposes. The court noted that the plaintiff did not provide a copy of the pre-sentence investigation report he alleged to be inaccurate to the trial court or to the court on appeal. Ms. *3. The court noted
“This court cannot assume error, nor can it presume the existence of facts [as] to which the record is silent.” The appellant has the burden of ensuring that the record contains sufficient evidence to warrant reversal.’” White v. Riley Constr., Inc., 745 So. 2d 877, 879 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999)(quoting Alfa Mut. Gen. Ins. Co. v. Oglesby, 711 So. 2d 938, 942 (Ala. 1997)).
Ms. *3, n. 2. Noting that the Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center Commission had set out an administrative procedure for aggrieved persons to seek correction or purging of inaccurate information in their criminal histories and that the plaintiff had not complied with same, the court affirmed the dismissal of the action based upon lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It stated:
Because Stowe has failed to comply with the procedures set forth in Rule 265-X-2-.03 and has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, Stowe did not properly invoke the jurisdiction of the trial court. Therefore, “the trial court had no subject matter jurisdiction, and, consequently no alternative but to dismiss the action.” State v. Property at 2018 Rainbow Drive, 740 So. 2d 1025, 1029 (Ala. 1999).