FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on February 24, 2003, 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.      By letter dated October 18, 2002, the complainant made a written request to the respondent for a copy of the “police report written by Officer O. Shaker on August 11, 2002, with respect to [the complainant’s] case.”

 

3.      By letter dated October 23, 2002, the respondent denied the complainant’s request and informed him that the requested record is exempt from disclosure pursuant to an exemption the exception to the Freedom of Information “FOI” Act because it involves an arrest.

 

4.      By letter dated October 25, 2002 and filed on October 28, 2002, the complainant appealed to this Commission alleging that the respondent violated the FOI Act by failing to comply with his request.

 

5.      Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

 

[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. 

 

6.      Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that “[a]ny person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record . . . .”

 

7.      It is found that the requested record is a public record within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.

 

8.      It is found that the complainant was arrested on August 11, 2002 and was charged with breach of peace and threatening.

 

9.      It is found that records related to the complainant’s arrest include a five page arrest report written by the arresting officer, Officer O. Shaker, a partial and unsigned written statement from the complainant’s wife, and arrest and booking forms.

 

10.  It is found that the complainant made several requests for the arrest report all of which were denied.

 

11.  It is found, however, that on or about January 24, 2003, the respondent provided the complainant with a copy of the press release related to the complainant’s arrest, which is the only document the complainant received in response to his request.

 

12.  At the hearing on this matter, the respondent claimed that at the time of the complainant’s original requests, which date back to August 2002, the respondent believed that the complainant already had a copy of the press release and did not want another copy of that record.  Consequently, he did not provide a copy of the press release until January.  The respondent also explained that he was not claiming any exemption to the disclosure of the arrest report but argued that pursuant to the FOI Act, the police department has the option, and is only obligated, to provide either an arrest report or a press release when requests are made for records pertaining to arrests.  The respondent claimed that the Farmington Police Department, as a matter of policy, provides a copy of the press release.  The respondent asserted that he complied with the FOI Act and made a good faith effort to accommodate the complainant. 

 

13.  Section 1-215(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

 

(a)  Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes to the contrary, and except as otherwise provided in this section, any record of the arrest of any person . . . shall be a public record from the time of such arrest and shall be disclosed in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212 and subsection (a) of section 1-210, except that disclosure of data or information other than that set forth in subdivision (1) of subsection (b) of this section shall be subject to the provisions of subdivision (3) of subsection (b) of section 1-210 . . .

 

and

 

(b)  For the purposes of this section, “record of the arrest” means (1) the name and address of the person arrested, the date, time and place of the arrest and the offense for which the person was arrested, and (2) at least one of the following, designated by the law enforcement agency:  the arrest report, incident report, news release or other similar report of the arrest of a person. 

 

14.  It is found that §1-215(b), G.S., applies only when a law enforcement agency claims that arrest records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to §1-210(b)(3), G.S., and requires that even if §1-210(b)(3), G.S., is applicable, the agency must disclose at a minimum the name and address of the person arrested, the date, time and place of the arrest, the offense for which the person was arrested and one of the following: an arrest report, incident report, news release or other similar report of the arrest of a person.

 

15.  It is found that the respondent does not claim that any of the records pertaining to the complainant’s arrest are exempt from disclosure under §1-210(b)(3), G.S.

 

16.  It is found therefore that the requested record must be disclosed in accordance with the provisions of §§1-210(a) and 1-212, G.S., and the respondent’s provision of simply a portion of the “record of the arrest,” as defined in §1-215(b), G.S., while in good faith, was not sufficient.

 

17.  Consequently, it is concluded that the respondent violated §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the police report written by Officer Shaker, as described in paragraphs 2 and 9, above. 

 

 

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.

 

1.      Forthwith the respondent shall provide the complainant with a copy of the police report described in paragraphs 2 and 9 of the findings above, free of charge.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of

July 9, 2003.

 

___________________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

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:

 

Werner E. Fuerst

281 Main Street

PO Box 1061

Farmington, CT  06034-1061

 

Chief, Police Department

Town of Farmington

319 New Britain Avenue

Unionville, CT  06085

 

 

 

 

___________________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2002-514FD/abg/07/11/2003