Request By:
Ms. Betty Lawrence
Circuit Court Clerk
Grant County Circuit Court
Williamstown, Kentucky 41097
Opinion
Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Amye B. Majors, Assistant Attorney General
Mr. Donald Sargent, an inmate at the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880, your response to his August 21, 1991, open records request for a copy of the trial transcript in Commonwealth v. Jerry and Donald Sargent , No. 86-CR-063.
Mr. Sargent indicates that you advised his girlfriend that you would provide him with a copy of the transcript at a cost of $ 1.00 per page. He complains that this is an excessive reproduction fee in view of his limited financial resources. He asks that we review your response to his request to determine if your actions were consistent with the Open Records Law. It is the opinion of this office that the records requested by Mr. Sargent are beyond the purview of the Open Records Law, and that you are therefore not required to comply with the "reasonable fee" provision of that law. KRS 61.874(2).
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
KRS 61.878(1)(j) excludes from the application of the Open Records Act "[p]ublic records or information the disclosure of which is prohibited or restricted or otherwise made confidential by enactment of the General Assembly." This provision, when read in tandem with KRS 26A.200, has been construed to exempt court records from the mandatory disclosure provisions of the Act. KRS 26A.200 provides, in part, that all records which are made by or generated for or received by any agency of the Court of Justice, or by any other court, agency, or officer responsible to the Court, are the property of the Court, and are subject to the control of the Supreme Court. Thus, court records enjoy a special status, and are placed under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court. OAG 78-262; OAG 85-9; OAG 87-53; OAG 90-4.
KRS 26A.220 provides:
All public officers, public agencies, or other persons having custody, control or possession of court records by statute or otherwise shall be subject to the direction of the Supreme Court with regard to such records and no such officer, agency, or person shall fail to comply with any rule, regulation, standard, procedure, or order issued by the Chief Justice or his designee.
In Ex Parte Farley, Ky., 570 S.W.2d 617, 624 (1978), the Kentucky Supreme Court observed:
On its face, the Open Records Law, KRS 61.870 - 61.884, incl. (Ch. 273, Acts, of 1976), appears to apply. Whether its provisions conflict with or are harmonious with KRS 26A.200 - 26A.220, incl. (Ch. 22, Acts of 1976 Ex. Sess.), we need not decide, because we are firmly of the opinion that the custody and control of the records generated by the courts in the course of their work are inseparable from the judicial function itself, and are not subject to statutory regulation.
This opinion establishes beyond cavil that the General Assembly has placed in the hands of the Chief Justice the handling and regulation of the records of the court.
The record requested by Mr. Sargent is clearly a court record, and is therefore not subject to the "reasonable fee" provision found at KRS 61.874(2). We note, however, that KRS 23A.205(2)(b), cited by the Administrative Office of the Courts as the controlling provision, sets a fifteen cent per page copying fee for documents generated by or for the circuit courts in criminal matters. Under this statute, the $ 1.00 per page reproduction fee that you quoted Mr. Sargent's girlfriend appears to be excessive. We urge you to consult the statute, or the Administrative Office of the Courts, to determine if your actions were consistent with the Court's policies.
As required by statute, a copy of this opinion will be sent to the requestor, Mr. Donald Sargent. He may challenge it in the appropriate court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5).