 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
|
April 13, 2004 Ms. Denise Obinegbo
OR2004-2967 Dear Ms. Obinegbo: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 199517. The Richardson Police Department (the "department") received two requests for information related to two specified addresses over certain time periods and any information related to the requestor and other named individuals. You state that the department has released some of the requested information to the requestor. However, you claim that a portion of the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101 and 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information. Initially, we note that you have not submitted any information responsive to one of the requested addresses. Therefore, to the extent that such responsive information exists, we assume the department has released it to the requestor. If not, the department must do so at this time. See Gov't Code §§ 552.006, .301, .302; see also Open Records Decision No. 664 (2000) (noting that if governmental body concludes that no exceptions apply to requested information, it must release information as soon as possible). In regard to the submitted information, section 552.108(a) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "[i]nformation held by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime . . . if: (1) release of the information would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime." Generally, a governmental body claiming section 552.108 must reasonably explain how and why the release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. See Gov't Code §§ 552.108(a)(1), (b)(1), .301(e)(1)(A); see also Ex parte Pruitt, 551 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977). You represent that the submitted information relates to pending criminal prosecutions. Based upon this representation, we conclude that the release of the submitted information would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime. See Houston Chronicle Publ'g Co. v. City of Houston, 531 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Civ. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1975), writ ref'd n.r.e. per curiam, 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1976) (court delineates law enforcement interests that are present in active cases). We note, however, that section 552.108 does not except basic information about an arrested person, an arrest, or a crime. Gov't Code § 552.108(c). Generally, the identity of a complainant must be released as basic information. However, in rare instances, a complainant's identity may be withheld under section 552.101 in conjunction with common law privacy, but only upon a showing of certain "special circumstances." See Open Records Decision No. 169 (1977).(1) This office considers such "special circumstances" to refer to a very narrow set of situations in which release of the information at issue would likely cause someone to face "an imminent threat of physical danger." Id. at 6. "Special circumstances" do not include "a generalized and speculative fear of harassment or retribution." Id. A determination of "special circumstances" can only be made on a case-by-case basis, with the initial determination made by the governing body. Id. at 7. In this instance, you explain that the complainant is the victim of a stalker and the charges filed include terroristic threat and harassment. Additionally, you assert that the release of the complainant's information "could also further jeopardize her safety." After reviewing these arguments and the submitted information, we conclude that you have demonstrated the existence of special circumstances that justify the withholding of the complainant's identity in this instance. Accordingly, the department must withhold the type of identifying information we have marked, but the remaining basic information, including a detailed description of the offenses, must be released. See Houston Chronicle Publishing Co. v. City of Houston, 531 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Civ. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1975), writ ref'd n.r.e. per curiam, 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex. 1976); see also Open Records Decision No. 127 (1976) (summarizing types of information considered to be basic information, including detailed description of offense). The department may withhold the remaining information in these reports under section 552.108 of the Government Code. We note, however, that you have the discretion to release all or part of the remaining information that is not otherwise confidential by law. Gov't Code § 552.007. 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, W. Montgomery Meitler
c: Mr. Bill Hirsch
Footnotes 1. Section 552.101 excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." |