Skip to main content

23-ORD-195

August 1, 2023

In re: Carlos Harris/Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex

Summary: The Office cannot find that the Eastern Kentucky
Correctional Complex (the “Complex”) violated the Open Records Act
(“the Act”) because the Office cannot resolve the factual dispute between
the requester and the agency.

Open Records Decision

On May 19, 2023, inmate Carlos Harris (“Appellant”) submitted to the
Complex a request for records containing two subparts. The first sought all records
regarding his Parole Board hearing held March 19, 2019. The second sought all
criminal risk assessments used by the Parole Board during the hearing. On June 11,
2023, having received no response from the Complex, the Appellant resubmitted the
request.1 On June 27, 2023, the Appellant initiated this appeal claiming he did not
receive any response from the Complex.

When an agency receives a request under the Act, it “shall determine within
five (5) [business] days . . . 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 five (5) day period, of its decision.” KRS 61.880(1) (emphasis added).

Here, the Appellant claims he submitted a request for records to the Complex
on May 19, 2023, and again on June 11, 2023, but it did not respond to either request.
On appeal, the Complex states it did not respond to the Appellant’s requests because

1
As proof, the Appellant provided a mail log that shows the Appellant mailed something to the
Complex on June 12, 2023.it did not receive them.2 The Office has previously found that it is unable to resolve
factual disputes between a requester and agency, such as, whether an agency
received a request for records. See, e.g., 21-ORD-163. As a result, the Office cannot
find that the Complex violated the Act when it did not respond to a request it claims
to have not received.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating an action in the
appropriate circuit court under KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882 within 30 days from
the date of this decision. Under KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General shall be notified
of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that action or in
any subsequent proceedings. The Attorney General will accept notice of the complaint
emailed to OAGAppeals@ky.gov.

Daniel Cameron

Attorney General

s/ Matthew Ray

Matthew Ray

Assistant Attorney General

#292

Distributed to:

Carlos Harris #143261
Amy V. Barker
Lydia C. Kendrick
Ann Smith

2
The Complex also provides what it describes as a “substantially different” request from the
Appellant, which was dated May 19, 2023. That request sought only records related to the hearing and
did not seek the criminal risk assessments. The Complex timely responded to that request, granted it,
and notified the Appellant that the responsive records would be provided upon receipt of $1.13 for the
copying fee. See KRS 61.872(3)(b) (permitting an agency to require prepayment of copying and mailing
fees before providing copies of records by mail).

LLM Summary
In 23-ORD-195, the Attorney General's Office determined that it could not find that the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex violated the Open Records Act as it could not resolve the factual dispute about whether the Complex received the records request from the appellant, Carlos Harris. The decision follows previous rulings that the Office is unable to resolve such factual disputes.
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:
Carlos Harris
Agency:
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex
Forward Citations:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

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