March 8, 2004

Chief Don Hatcher
Leander Police Department
P.O. Box 319
Leander, Texas 78646-0319

OR2004-1750

Dear Chief Hatcher:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 200289.

The Leander Police Department (the "department") received a request for information pertaining to an arrest. You assert the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.108, and 552.130 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information.

Section 552.101 excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." This section encompasses information protected by other statutes. Section 58.007 of the Family Code makes certain juvenile law enforcement records confidential. Family Code section 51.04(a) states that the Juvenile Justice Code, Title 3 of the Family Code, "covers the proceedings in all cases involving the delinquent conduct or conduct indicating the need for supervision engaged in by a person who was a child within the meaning of [Title 3] at the time he engaged in the conduct." Thus, section 58.007 deems confidential law enforcement records from all cases involving a child engaging in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating the need for supervision. After reviewing the offense report, we conclude that section 58.007 is inapplicable because there are no juvenile suspects. Therefore, we conclude that the offense report is not excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 58.007 of the Family Code.

Section 261.201(a) of the Family Code provides as follows:

(a) The following information is confidential, is not subject to public release under Chapter 552, Government Code, and may be disclosed only for purposes consistent with this code and applicable federal or state law or under rules adopted by an investigating agency:

(1) a report of alleged or suspected abuse or neglect made under this chapter and the identity of the person making the report; and

(2) except as otherwise provided in this section, the files, reports, records, communications, audiotapes, videotapes, and working papers used or developed in an investigation under this chapter or in providing services as a result of an investigation.

The information at issue was used or developed in an investigation of child abuse. Thus, we find that the information is within the scope of section 261.201 of the Family Code. You have not indicated that the department has adopted a rule that governs the release of this type of information. Therefore, we assume that no such regulation exists. Given that assumption, the information is confidential pursuant to section 261.201 of the Family Code. See Open Records Decision No. 440 at 2 (1986) (predecessor statute). Accordingly, the department must withhold the submitted information from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code as information made confidential by law.

We note that the submitted information includes an arrest warrant and a complaint. The Seventy-eighth Legislature amended article 15.26 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which became effective September 1, 2003. Article 15.26 states "[t]he arrest warrant, and any affidavit presented to the magistrate in support of the issuance of the warrant, is public information." Crim. Proc. Code art. 15.26. Article 15.04 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that "[t]he affidavit made before the magistrate or district or county attorney is called a 'complaint' if it charges the commission of an offense." Crim. Proc. Code art. 15.04. Case law indicates that a complaint can support the issuance of an arrest warrant. See Janecka v. State, 739 S.W.2d 813, 822-23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987); Villegas v. State, 791 S.W.2d 226, 235 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi1990, pet. ref'd); Borsari v. State, 919 S.W.2d 913, 918 (Tex. App.--Houston [14 Dist.] 1996, pet. ref'd) (discussing well-established principle that complaint in support of arrest warrant need not contain same particularity required of indictment).

Generally, information used or developed in an investigation of child abuse under chapter 261 of the Family Code must be withheld in its entirety under section 261.201. Thus, there is a conflict of laws between section 261.201 and article 15.26. However, where information falls within both a general and a specific statutory provision, the specific provision prevails over the general. See Cuellar v. State, 521 S.W.2d 277 (Tex.Crim.App.1975) (under well-established rule of statutory construction, specific statutory provisions prevail over general ones); Open Records Decision Nos. 598 (1991), 583 (1990), 451 (1986). We find that the public availability provision in article 15.26 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is more specific than the general confidentiality provision in section 261.201. Thus, article 15.26 more specifically governs the public availability of the submitted arrest warrant and complaint and prevails over the more general confidentiality provision in section 261.201. See Lufkin v. City of Galveston, 63 Tex. 437 (1885) (when two sections of an act apply, and one is general and the other is specific, then the specific controls); see also Gov't Code § 311.026 (where a general statutory provision conflicts with a specific provision, the specific provision prevails as an exception to the general provision). Therefore, the department must release the submitted arrest warrant and complaint to the requestor.

In summary, we conclude (1) the department must release the arrest warrant and complaint under article 15.26 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and (2) the remaining information must be withheld under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 261.201 of the Family Code. Because section 261.201 is dispositive, we do not address the department's other arguments.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular records at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other records or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For example, governmental bodies are prohibited from asking the attorney general to reconsider this ruling. Gov't Code § 552.301(f). If the governmental body wants to challenge this ruling, the governmental body must appeal by filing suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. § 552.324(b). In order to get the full benefit of such an appeal, the governmental body must file suit within 10 calendar days. Id. § 552.353(b)(3), (c). If the governmental body does not appeal this ruling and the governmental body does not comply with it, then both the requestor and the attorney general have the right to file suit against the governmental body to enforce this ruling. Id. § 552.321(a).

If this ruling requires the governmental body to release all or part of the requested information, the governmental body is responsible for taking the next step. Based on the statute, the attorney general expects that, within 10 calendar days of this ruling, the governmental body will do one of the following three things: 1) release the public records; 2) notify the requestor of the exact day, time, and place that copies of the records will be provided or that the records can be inspected; or 3) notify the requestor of the governmental body's intent to challenge this letter ruling in court. If the governmental body fails to do one of these three things within 10 calendar days of this ruling, then the requestor should report that failure to the attorney general's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. The requestor may also file a complaint with the district or county attorney. Id. § 552.3215(e).

If this ruling requires or permits the governmental body to withhold all or some of the requested information, the requestor can appeal that decision by suing the governmental body. Id. § 552.321(a); Texas Dep't of Pub. Safety v. Gilbreath, 842 S.W.2d 408, 411 (Tex. App.--Austin 1992, no writ).

Please remember that under the Act the release of information triggers certain procedures for costs and charges to the requestor. If records are released in compliance with this ruling, be sure that all charges for the information are at or below the legal amounts. Questions or complaints about over-charging must be directed to Hadassah Schloss at the Texas Building and Procurement Commission at (512) 475-2497.

If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments about this ruling, they may contact our office. We note that a third party may challenge this ruling by filing suit seeking to withhold information from a requestor. Gov't Code § 552.325. Although there is no statutory deadline for contacting us, the attorney general prefers to receive any comments within 10 calendar days of the date of this ruling.

Sincerely,

Yen-Ha Le
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division
YHL/sdk
Ref: ID# 200289
Enc. Submitted documents

c: Ms. Karen Rider
Investigations Unlimited LLC
P.O. Box 27798
Austin, Texas 78755-7798
(w/o enclosures)