Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: A. B. CHANDLER III, ATTORNEY GENERAL; AMYE L. BENSENHAVER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
OPEN RECORDS DECISION
This matter having been presented to the Attorney General in an open records appeal, and the Attorney General being sufficiently advised, we find that Otter Creek Correctional Center properly denied Mark Lawrence Dyer's request for a copy of his presentence investigation report pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(l) and KRS 439.510. 1
We believe that 94-ORD-71, and the authorities cited therein, are controlling. A copy of 94-ORD-71 is attached hereto, and incorporated by reference. 96-ORD-94, cited by Mr. Dyer in support of his position, is inapposite. When a specific statute directs the nondisclosure of a specific record, there is no need for further explanation. Otter Creek Correctional Center is not required to provide Mr. Dyer with a copy of his PSI. All other issues which he raises are not cognizable under the Open Records Act.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.
Footnotes
Footnotes
1 Records custodian Sharon Watterson incorrectly cited KRS 61.878(1)(l) as KRS 61.878(1)(I). It is unclear whether the error was the result of a mistake in transcription or a miscite. What is clear is that Ms. Watterson intended to cite KRS 61.878(1)(l), which incorporates KRS 439.510 into the Open Records Act. This office will not render an adverse decision against a public agency, based on a technical error, when the requested record is clearly exempt. To do so would be tantamount to ordering a public agency to violate state law by disclosing a confidential record.