 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
|
September 14, 2005 Ms. Julie B. Ross
OR2005-08381 Dear Ms. Ross: 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# 232203. The City of Coppell (the "city"), which you represent, received a request for information related to a named officer of the Coppell Police Department (the "department"). You state you have released some information but claim the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101, 552.102, 552.108, 552.117, 552.1175, 552.119, and 552.137 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information. Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from public disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." Gov't Code § 552.101. This section encompasses the common-law right of privacy, which protects information that is 1) highly intimate or embarrassing, such that its release would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and 2) not of legitimate concern to the public. Indus. Found. v. Tex. Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668 (Tex. 1976). The types of information considered intimate and embarrassing by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation included information relating to sexual assault, pregnancy, mental or physical abuse in the workplace, illegitimate children, psychiatric treatment of mental disorders, attempted suicide, and injuries to sexual organs. Id. at 683. Generally, only highly intimate information that implicates the privacy of an individual is withheld. However, in instances of sexual assault or suicide, where it is demonstrated that the requestor knows the identity of the victim, as well as the nature of the incident, all the information at issue must be withheld to protect the victim's privacy. Here, although you seek to withhold the submitted information in its entirety, you have not demonstrated, nor does the information reflect, a situation in which all of it must be withheld on the basis of common-law privacy. Accordingly, you may not withhold the submitted information in its entirety under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy. Section 552.108(a) 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). This exception is generally not applicable to the records of an internal affairs investigation that is purely administrative in nature and that does not involve the investigation or prosecution of crime. See City of Fort Worth v. Cornyn, 86 S.W.3d 320 (Tex. App.--Austin 2002, no pet.), Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519, 525-26 (Tex. Civ. App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied) (statutory predecessor to section 552.108 not applicable to internal investigation that did not result in criminal investigation or prosecution). In this instance, the information at issue consists of information from an internal affairs investigation by the city's police department, including information obtained from a criminal investigation conducted by the Bedford Police Department. You explain, and the records reflect, that both the internal affairs investigation and the criminal investigation pertain to the same incident. You have provided a supporting affidavit from the Bedford Police Department objecting to the release of the submitted information because the release would interfere with the ongoing criminal investigation by that office. Based upon your representations and our review, 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). Thus, we agree that section 552.108(a)(1) is applicable to the submitted information. See Open Records Decision No. 372 at 4 (1983) (law enforcement exception can apply to information held by proper custodian of information relating to incident allegedly involving criminal conduct that remains under active investigation or prosecution); see also Open Records Decision No. 586 (1991) (need of another governmental body to withhold requested information may provide compelling reason for nondisclosure under section 552.108). We note, however, that basic information about an arrested person, an arrest, or a crime is not excepted from disclosure under section 552.108. Gov't Code § 552.108(c). Basic information refers to the information held to be public in Houston Chronicle. See Open Records Decision No. 127 (1976) (summarizing types of information considered to be basic information). Nevertheless, information that tends to identify a victim of sexual assault is protected under common law privacy. See Open Records Decision No. 339 (1982); Morales v. Ellen, 840 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. App.--El Paso 1992, writ denied) (identity of witnesses to and victims of sexual harassment was highly intimate or embarrassing information and public did not have a legitimate interest in such information). Thus, the department must withhold basic information identifying the alleged sexual assault victim pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common law privacy. The remaining basic information must be released. The department may withhold the remainder of the information at issue pursuant to section 552.108(a)(1) of the Government Code.(1) We note that the department has the discretion to release all or part of this 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, 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); 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 Office of the Attorney General 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. 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, Ramsey A. Abarca
c: Mr. Brandon Formby
Footnotes 1. Based on our determination, we need not address your remaining arguments against disclosure. POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB:WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |