|
December 10, 2003
Ms. Alicia R. Zatcoff
Legal Advisor, Richmond Police Department
Richmond, Virginia
The staff of the Freedom of
Information Advisory Council is authorized to issue advisory
opinions. The ensuing staff advisory opinion is based solely upon
the information presented in your e-mail of October 28, 2003.
Dear Ms. Zatcoff:
You have asked a question concerning access to criminal
investigation records under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA). Specifically, you have asked whether a conflict exists
between subdivision F 1 of § 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia,
which exempts case files relating to a criminal investigation from
disclosure, and subsection G of § 2.2-3706, which requires
records kept by law-enforcement agencies pursuant to §
15.2-1722 to be available for public inspection and copying.
You indicate that the Richmond Police Department ("the
Department") received a FOIA request for a police file regarding a
1997 homicide. The requester specifically asked to see initial
witness statements, notes from the police officers, the police
reports, the autopsy report, and any other information in the file.
The Department responded in writing and withheld the requested
records pursuant to subdivision F 1 of § 2.2-3706. You
indicate that the Department received a second request for the same
records. The requester argued that subsection G of § 2.2-3706
mandated release of information kept by law-enforcement agencies as
required by § 15.2-1722, and that § 15.2-1722 required
local police departments to keep investigative and arrest records.
Therefore, the requester asserted that he was entitled to the
requested records.
Subsection A of § 2.2-3704 requires that [e]xcept as
otherwise specifically provided by law, all public records shall be
open to inspection and copying. Section 2.2-3706 generally
governs access to law-enforcement records. Subdivision F 1 of
§ 2.2-3706 allows a custodian to withhold from public
disclosure [c]omplaints memoranda, correspondence, case files or
reports, witness statements, and evidence relating to a criminal
investigation or prosecution. However, subsection G of §
2.2-3706 states that [r]ecords kept by law-enforcement agencies
as required by § 15.2-1722 shall be subject to [FOIA].
Section 15.2-1722 requires the sheriffs or chiefs of police of
localities to keep adequate personnel, arrest, investigative,
reportable incidents, and noncriminal incidents records necessary
for the efficient operation of a law-enforcement agency.
Therefore, your question stems from the apparent conflict between
the language of subdivision F 1 of § 2.2-3706, which would
exempt a police file relating to a homicide investigation from
disclosure, and subsection G of § 2.2-3706, which declares
that records held by local police, including investigative records,
are subject to public inspection and copying.
As the result of recommendations made by a joint subcommittee
studying FOIA, the General Assembly made substantial changes to
FOIA in 1999, including the creation of a section devoted to access
to law-enforcement records.1 The
creation of the law-enforcement section was due in part to the
conflict of various Code sections relating to law-enforcement
records. This change to FOIA also reflected the policy that it is
in the public interest to protect certain law-enforcement records
from public disclosure so as not to impede law enforcement's
ability to effectively conduct criminal investigations and to
protect the safety of officers, undercover operatives, victims, and
the public generally. As a result, certain exemptions were
clarified and an attempt was made to put law-enforcement exemptions
into one section in the Code. These changes included the new
language found in subsections F and G of § 2.2-3706, which
prior to 1999 did not exist in FOIA.
A review of the history of § 15.2-1722 indicates that this
provision is not directly related to access to records.
Instead, the provision relates to records managements and retention
by local law-enforcement officials. It requires sheriffs and chiefs
of police to ensure the maintenance of certain records, and
requires such individuals to relinquish these records to their
successors in office. The provision ensures that local
law-enforcement agencies keep adequate records -- it does not speak
directly to whether these records must be disseminated or may be
withheld.
Until the 1999 rewrite of FOIA, § 15.2-1722 also included a
provision exempting all records mentioned in that section from
FOIA. With the creation of the FOIA section relating specifically
to law-enforcement records, this provision was repealed. In its
place, subsections F and G of § 2.2-3706 were enacted in FOIA
itself to address access to these records. Subdivision F 1 of
§ 2.2-3706 allows investigative records to be withheld
generally, regardless of whether such records are held by the state
police, local law-enforcement agencies, or any other entity that
investigates or prosecutes criminal activity. Subsection G requires
that records held by sheriffs and chiefs of police be open, but
recognizes that certain records, while not criminal in nature, may
also contain sensitive information that should be protected from
public disclosure. Subdivisions G 1, G 2 and G 3 of § 2.2-3706
address these other records and set forth exemptions for portions
of noncriminal incident reports that contain personal, medical or
financial information, records relating to undercover operations,
and background investigations of law-enforcement personnel
applicants.
In interpreting two statutes that might appear to conflict,
rules of statutory construction dictate that statutes related to
the same subject should be considered in pari materia to
achieve a harmonious result.2 In
pari materia literally means "on the same subject; relating to
the same manner."3 As such, statutes
relating to the same matter must be construed together so that an
inconsistency in one statute may be resolved by looking at another
statute on the same subject. Applying this rule to interpret
subsections F and G of § 2.2-3706, it becomes clear that the
General Assembly intended for records relating to criminal
investigations and prosecutions to be exempt from public
disclosure, whether such records are held by state or local
law-enforcement officials. To reach a different conclusion would
result in an inconsistent application of the law where records of a
murder investigation by the state police could be withheld, but
records of an identical investigation conducted by a local police
department would be subject to disclosure. The policy of protecting
the public safety by safeguarding the integrity of a criminal
investigation is the same regardless of whether state or local
law-enforcement personnel conduct the investigation. In addition, a
reading of subsection G of § 2.2-3706 that would require the
release of criminal investigation records would essentially negate
the exemption allowed for by subdivision F 1 of §
2.2-3706.
In conclusion, the Department's records of a homicide
investigation may be properly withheld pursuant to subdivision F 1
of § 2.2-3706. This exemption applies generally to all
criminal investigative records. The provisions found in subsection
G at § 2.2-3706 recognize that in addition to maintaining
criminal investigative records, local law-enforcement agencies are
also required to create and maintain other types of records,
including noncriminal incident records and personnel records. These
records may also contain some sensitive information that is not
criminal in nature, but that may nonetheless be withheld from
public disclosure.
Thank you for contacting this office. I hope that I have been of
assistance.
Sincerely,
Maria J.K. Everett
Executive Director
1HJR No. 187 (1998). See House
Document No. 106 (2000) for a summary of the Joint Subcommittee's
work. The law enforcement provision, currently found at §
2.2-3706, was initially enacted as § 2.1-342.2 (1999).
2See Prillaman v. Commonwealth,
199 Va. 401 (1957). See also 2001 Op.
Atty. Gen. Va. 122, Virginia
Freedom of Information Advisory Opinion 06 (2003).
3See Black's Law Dictionary (7th
Edition).
|