FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
R. Levine, |
|
||
|
|
Complainants |
|
|
|
|
against |
Docket #FIC 2000-542 |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Respondents |
May 23, 2001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 27, 2000, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.
2. It is found that by letter dated September 27, 2000, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with access to all records relating to the following (hereinafter “requested records”):
a. any determination as to whether the Colt AR-15 Sporter A1, Colt AR-15 A2 Sporter II, Colt AR-15 9mm Carbine, Colt AR-15 Model SP 1, Colt AR-15 A2 HBAR Sporter, Colt Sporter Match HBAR, and/or Colt AR-15 Sporter A3, rifles are in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
b. any determination as to whether the FMAP “DM” Rosario rifle LSR (FAL) manufactured in Argentina, and imported by Armscorp is in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
c. any determination as to whether the Galil Model 323, 329 and/or 392 rifles are in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
d. any determination as to whether the Daewood Model 200 rifle is in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
e. any determination as to whether the Norinco Model Mak-90 rifle is in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
f. any determination as to whether the Norinco Model AKS National Match rifle is in violation of §53-202a, G.S.;
g. any determination and/or redefinition and/or expansion of the definition of what type(s) and/or make(s) and/or model(s) are included in the phrase “Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type” as used in §53-202a, G.S.;
h. in the alternative, produce all records that one or more of the above firearms have been determined to be included in and/or as one or more of the defined firearms set forth in §53-202a, G.S.
3. By letter dated September 27, 2000 and filed on September 29,
2000, the complainant appealed to this Commission alleging that the respondent
violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to provide him
with access to the requested records.
4. It is found that by letter dated October 19, 2000, the
respondent provided the complainant with a copy of §53-202a, G.S., which
provision defines “assault weapons”, and informed the complainant that
the respondent does
not have any other records responsive to his request.
5.
Section
1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:
[e]xcept
as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records
maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such
records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public
records and every person shall have the right . . . to receive a copy of such
records in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212.
Any agency rule or regulation, or part thereof, that conflicts with the
provisions of this subsection or diminishes or curtails in any way the rights
granted by this subsection shall be void.
[Emphasis added.]
6. It is found that the respondent does not maintain or keep on file any records that are responsive to the complainant’s request.
7. Consequently, it is concluded that the respondent did not violate §1-210(a), G.S., as alleged in the complaint.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The complaint is dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of May 23, 2001.
_________________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
R. Levine
Box 2539
New York, NY 10008
State of Connecticut, Department
of Public Safety; Division of
State Police
c/o Lynn D. Wittenbrink, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC/2000-542/FD/paj/05/29/2001