 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
|
May 17, 2005 Ms. Pamela Smith
OR2005-04251 Dear Ms. Smith: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 224149. The Texas Department of Public Safety (the "department") received a request for information reflecting whether any criminal history checks were requested by the Pampa Police Department and/or Gray County Sheriff's Office regarding a named individual. You claim that the requested information is excepted from disclosure pursuant to sections 552.101 and 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information. We have also received comments submitted by the requestor. See Gov't Code § 552.304 (providing that interested party may submit comments stating why information should or should not be released). Section 552.108(b)(1) excepts from disclosure "[a]n internal record or notation of a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that is maintained for internal use in matters relating to law enforcement or prosecution. . . if: (1) release of the internal record or notation would interfere with law enforcement or prosecution." A governmental body that raises section 552.108 must reasonably explain how and why section 552.108 is applicable to the information. See Gov't Code § 552.301(e)(1)(A); see also Ex parte Pruitt, 551 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977); Open Records Decision No. 434 at 2-3 (1986). Section 552.108(b)(1) is intended to protect "information which, if released, would permit private citizens to anticipate weaknesses in a police department, avoid detection, jeopardize officer safety, and generally undermine police efforts to effectuate the laws of this State." City of Fort Worth v. Cornyn, 86 S.W.3d 320, 327 (Tex. App.--Austin 2002, no pet.). This office has concluded that this provision protects certain kinds of information, the disclosure of which might compromise the security or operations of a law enforcement agency. See, e.g., Open Records Decision Nos. 531 (1989) (detailed guidelines regarding police department's use of force policy), 508 (1988) (information relating to future transfers of prisoners), 413 (1984) (sketch showing security measures for forthcoming execution), 211 (1978) (information relating to undercover narcotics investigations), 143 (1977) (log revealing use of electronic eavesdropping equipment). You inform us that the requested information consists of logs of criminal history checks made via the Texas Law Enforcement Telecommunications System ("TLETS"). You explain that the TLETS logs are created and maintained by the department for purposes of monitoring use of the system and assuring that unauthorized individuals do not have access to confidential information. You assert that release of TLETS logs "could easily give a criminal sufficient warning to evade detection and/or prosecution." You state that "a records check might be run well before the time an individual is officially or openly identified as a suspect in a case and before the individual has ever been contacted by police," and contend that "an individual engaged in illegal activity who can find out whether any law enforcement agency has run checks on him/her . . .can obviously gain valuable knowledge in terms of concealing his/her activities from law enforcement scrutiny." Thus, you assert that release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement activities. Based on your arguments and the information you provided, we agree that release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. We therefore conclude that the requested information may be withheld under section 552.108(b)(1) of the Government Code.(1) 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, upon receiving this ruling, the governmental body will either release the public records promptly pursuant to section 552.221(a) of the Government Code or file a lawsuit challenging this ruling pursuant to section 552.324 of the Government Code. If the governmental body fails to do one of these things, 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); Tex. 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, Debbie K. Lee
c: Mr. Donnell W. Yandell
Footnotes 1. As our ruling is dispositive, we do not address your remaining claim. POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB:WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |