FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Thomas P. Lally,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 95-185
Edward T. Arrington, Warden,
Hartford Correctional Center,
Respondent February 14, 1996
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on December 6, 1995, at which time the complainant appeared and presented
testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint, but the respondent failed to
appear.
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 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter
dated May 16, 1995, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him
with copies of "the documents wherein [you] describe the facts and/or
information that you used to make your determination that I should be accused
of the crime of larceny. On January 5th
and 7th I was interrogated and questioned by the State Police based upon your
complaint."
3. By letter
dated May 25, 1995, the respondent claimed that he had not referred the matter
to the state police, and suggested that the complainant make an inquiry with
the administration at the Northeast Correctional Center in Mansfield,
Connecticut, where the complainant is employed.
4. By letter
dated May 30, 1995 and filed June 1, 1995, the complainant appealed to the
Commission and alleged that the respondent violated the FOI Act by denying his
records request.
5. It is
found that the complainant is legally blind and utilizes special equipment to
perform his duties as an employee of the Department of Corrections, and that
the complainant was subjected to an investigation by the state police
concerning the location of that equipment in January 1995.
#FIC 95-185 Page
2
6. It is
further found that the equipment utilized by the complainant is provided to him
by the state Board of Education and Services for the Blind, and that the
complainant is directly responsible for such equipment.
7. It is
found that the respondent, who in January 1995 was the Director of Region II,
referred certain allegations concerning the complainant to the state police for
investigation.
8. The
Commission, however, has insufficient evidence to determine whether the complaint made to the state police was oral
or written, or whether any documents exist which would be responsive to the
complainant's request.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1. The
respondent shall immediately conduct a search for any records which are
responsive to the complainant's request, in whatever form, either within his
possession or subject to his control, and to the extent such records exist,
provide the complainant with copies of such records free of charge.
2. If the
search ordered in paragraph 1 of the order, above, reveals that no records
exist which are responsive to the complainant's request, then the respondent
shall execute an affidavit detailing the particulars of his search and stating
that no such documents exist, and provide the complainant with such affidavit
within one week of the issuance of the final decision in this matter.
Approved by Order of the Freedom
of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 14, 1996.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
Docket #FIC 95-185 Page
3
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:
Thomas P. Lally
P.O. Box 674
Storrs, CT 06268
Edward T. Arrington, Warden
Hartford Correctional Center
177 Weston Street
Hartford, CT 06120
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission