Request By:
Donald Ray Hall, # 153862
Edison G. Banks, II
Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; Michelle D. Harrison, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
At issue in this appeal is whether the Commonwealth's Attorney for the 47th Judicial Circuit violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in denying Donald Ray Hall's request for "a copy of the plea offer made you [sic] in Case No. 00-CR-59 wherein I was offered a plea for 10 years." On February 11, 2008, Edison G. Banks, II, Commonwealth's Attorney, responded to Mr. Hall's request, advising that "the information requested is no longer maintained due to the age of the file." Citing KRS 61.878(1)(h), Mr. Banks further noted that such records are exempt under the Open Records Act. Accordingly, he was unable to provide Mr. Hall with "a copy of the Commonwealth's Written Offer, if in fact such a document ever existed." 1 By letter dated February 18, 2008, Mr. Hall initiated this appeal, contending that the "Commonwealth still has its file concerning the case, as it must be maintained. The Case is no longer under criminal investigation and at present there is no litigation as all matters have been held in abeyance." Upon receiving notification of Mr. Hall's appeal from this office, Mr. Banks supplemented his response, asserting that his original response "adequately sets forth" his position. Mr. Banks also explained that he does "not maintain files once the Appeal is denied by the Kentucky Supreme Court as was done in his case." In fact, Mr. Banks is not sure that a copy of the Commonwealth's Offer "ever existed as the Offer may have been verbal or as is nearly always the case, the original written Offer is given to the Defendant and their attorney and we do not receive a copy until the Offer is executed by the Defendant and their Attorney." Contrary to Mr. Hall's assertion, Mr. Banks is not aware of any requirement that a file be maintained indefinitely nor does Mr. Banks believe that any portion of his files is necessarily subject to the Open Records Act.
In our view, 00-ORD-116 and 04-ORD-153 are controlling on the facts presented; a copy of each decision is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. KRS 61.878(1)(h) mandates that "records or information compiled and maintained by county attorneys or Commonwealth's attorneys pertaining to criminal investigations or criminal litigation," shall remain exempt "after enforcement action, including litigation, is completed or a decision is made to take no action." Because records like those requested are permanently excluded from application of the Open Records Act by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(h), the Commonwealth's Attorney for the 47th Judicial District cannot be said to have violated the Act in denying Mr. Hall's request.
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.
Footnotes
Footnotes
1 In conclusion, Mr. Banks advised Mr. Hall to contact his "former attorney to determine if they have maintained your file and if so, whether such a document exists." Even if KRS 61.878(1)(h) did not apply, Mr. Banks would prevail as the Attorney General has long recognized that a public agency cannot produce for inspection or copying a nonexistent record, but discharges its duty under the Act by affirmatively indicating that no such record exists in a timely written response and providing a brief explanation as to why. See 07-ORD-112.