Skip to main content

Opinion

Opinion By: Gregory D. Stumbo, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Decision

The question presented in this appeal is whether the actions of the Commonwealth's Attorney for the 45th Judicial Circuit violated the Open Records Act relative to Robert A. Facen's request for "a copy of all reports, notes, indictments or charges that comes from case number 2041699." Mr. Facen asserts that he received no response to his request, prompting him to initiate this appeal. For the reasons that follow, we find that although the Commonwealth's Attorney may have failed to comply with the procedural requirements of the Open Records Act, set forth at KRS 61.880(1), the Commonwealth's Attorney could properly withhold access to the requested records under authority of KRS 61.878(1)(h).

In 1992, the Kentucky Open Records Act was amended to include the following permanent exception to the general rule of mandatory disclosure of public records:

Records of law enforcement agencies or agencies involved in administrative adjudication that were compiled in the process of detecting and investigating statutory or regulatory violations if the disclosure of the information would harm the agency by revealing the identity of informants not otherwise known or by premature release of information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action or administrative adjudication. Unless exempted by other provisions of KRS 61.870 to 61.884, public records exempted under this provision shall be open after enforcement action is completed or a decision is made to take no action; however, records or information compiled and maintained by county attorneys or Commonwealth's attorneys pertaining to criminal investigations or criminal litigation shall be exempted from the provisions of KRS 61.870 to 61.884 and shall remain exempted after enforcement action, including litigation, is completed or a decision is made to take no action. The exemptions provided by this subsection shall not be used by the custodian of the records to delay or impede the exercise of rights granted by KRS 61.870 to 61.884.

KRS 61.878(1)(h) (emphasis added). In enacting KRS 61.878(1)(h) the General Assembly clearly intended to afford permanent protection to records of the Commonwealth's Attorney which relate to criminal investigations or criminal litigation. See

Skaggs v. Redford, Ky., 844 S.W.2d 389 (1993) and 93-ORD-137. Accordingly, we find that the Commonwealth's Attorney was under no obligation to honor Mr. Facen's requests.

This exception does not, however, relieve the Commonwealth's Attorney of the procedural obligations under KRS 61.880(1). That statute provides:

Each public agency, upon any request for records made under KRS 61.870 to 61.884, shall determine within three (3) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the person making the request, within the three (3) day period, of its decision. An agency response denying, in whole or in part, inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. The response shall be issued by the official custodian or under his authority, and it shall constitute final agency action.

In order to fully discharge the obligations under the Open Records Act, the Commonwealth's Attorney must respond to a records request in writing and within three business days, and advise the requester that the records he is seeking are excluded from inspection by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(h). To the extent that the Commonwealth's Attorney failed to do so, his actions constituted a violation of KRS 61.880(1).

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.

LLM Summary
The decision addresses an appeal concerning the Commonwealth's Attorney for the 45th Judicial Circuit's handling of an open records request. The request was for specific documents related to a criminal case, which the Commonwealth's Attorney did not respond to. The decision finds that while the Commonwealth's Attorney failed to meet the procedural requirements of the Open Records Act by not responding within the stipulated time, the requested records were rightfully withheld under KRS 61.878(1)(h), which protects records related to criminal investigations or litigation. The decision emphasizes the need for the Commonwealth's Attorney to comply with procedural obligations despite the records being exempt from disclosure.
Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Requested By:
Robert A. Facen
Agency:
Commonwealth’s Attorney for the 45th Judicial Circuit
Type:
Open Records Decision
Lexis Citation:
2005 Ky. AG LEXIS 135
Cites:
Forward Citations:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.