|Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas
September 15, 2000
Mr. Miles K. Risley
Dear Mr. Risley:
You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID#140671.
The City of Victoria (the "city") received a request for various information related to several named individuals. You state that some of the requested information has been released to the requestor, but claim that the remaining responsive documents are excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with sections 58.007 and 261.201 of the Family Code, as well as section 552.108 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information.(1)
Section 552.101 excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision." 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, and working papers used or developed in an investigation under this chapter or in providing services as a result of an investigation.
Because a portion of the requested information relates to an allegation of child abuse, the documents are within the scope of section 261.201 of the Family Code. You have not indicated that the city 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 documents related to VPD Case #9815321 are confidential pursuant to section 261.201 of the Family Code. See Open Records Decision No. 440 at 2 (1986)(predecessor statute). Accordingly, the city must withhold these documents from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code as information made confidential by law.(2) Furthermore, because section 261.201(a) protects all "files, reports, communications, and working papers" related to an investigation of child abuse, the city must not release front page offense report information in cases of alleged child abuse. As we resolve your request related to VPD Case #9815321 under section 261.201 of the Family Code, we need not address your argument under section 58.007.
We next address your argument under section 552.108. Section 552.108, the "law enforcement exception," provides in part:
(a) [i]nformation held by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime is excepted from the requirements of 552.021 if: (1) release of the information would interfere with the detection, investigation or prosecution of crime; (2) it is information that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime only in relation to an investigation that did not result in conviction or deferred adjudication; or (3) it is information that: (A) is prepared by an attorney representing the state in anticipation of or in the course of preparing for criminal litigation; or (B) reflects the mental impressions or legal reasoning of an attorney representing the state.
Generally, a governmental body claiming an exception under section 552.108 must reasonably explain, if the information does not supply the explanation on its face, 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(b)(1); see also Ex parte Pruitt, 551 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1977). The information submitted relating to VPD Case #9506305 involves a theft offense that occurred on April 18, 1995. You state that the requested information relates to a pending case. However, the maximum statute of limitations for theft is five years from the date of the commission of the offense. Code Crim. Proc. art. 12.01(4)(A); see also Code Crim. Proc. art. 12.02. You have not explained how or why release of the requested information would interfere with the investigation of an offense for which the statute of limitations has run. Thus, because you have not shown the applicability of section 552.108, we conclude that you may not withhold the requested information under section 552.108. As you raise no other exceptions to withhold this information, we conclude that you must release the submitted information related to VPD Case #9506305.
In conclusion, the requested information relating to VPD Case #9815321 must be withheld from the requestor pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code, in conjunction with section 261.201 of the Family Code. The requested information related to VPD Case #9506305 must be released to the requestor.
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 thegovernmental 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 Department of Public 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 the General Services 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. 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.
Michael A. Pearle
Encl. Submitted documents
cc: Ms. Linda Jonckers
1. We note you have submitted some but not all of the documents sought by the requestor. We therefore conclude that the remaining information either does not exist or has been released to the requestor.
2. We note, however, that if the Texas Department of Regulatory Services has created a file on this alleged abuse, the child's parent(s) may have the statutory right to review that file. See Fam. Code § 261.201(f).