Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: Albert B. Chandler III, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter comes to the Attorney General as an appeal by Robert D. Townsend in connection with his open records requests for copies of his trial transcripts and other trial materials in his cases, 94-CR-00024 and 97-CR-00035, from the court reporter for the Montgomery Circuit Court.
Mr. Townsend's letter of appeal to this office, dated June 28, 2000, stated that he had received no information pertaining to the records he had requested.
After receipt of this office's "Notification to Agency of Receipt of Open Records Appeal," Patty Tipton submitted a response to Mr. Townsend's letter of appeal. In her response, Ms. Tipton stated that her office, Patty Tipton's Court Reporters' Inc., had prepared the transcripts in the 94-CR-00024 case of Mr. Townsend, which was on appeal, and filed the transcripts with the clerk. Copies of the transcripts in that case were being forwarded to Mr. Townsend. Regarding the transcripts in case 97-CR-00035, Ms. Tipton advised that her office was in the process of working on those transcripts for Mr. Townsend's use. She explained that because her office had not received a notice of appeal in that case, the transcripts had not been completed or filed. As to his request for other trial items, Ms. Tipton advised that her office did not have possession of those items and that Mr. Townsend would need to contact the appropriate party for those items, which may be the Montgomery County Circuit Clerk, the Commonwealth Attorney, or Mr. Townsend's trial counsel.
This office has consistently recognized that records of the courts are not governed by the Open Records Act. In Ex Parte Farley, Ky., 570 S.W.2d 617, 624 (1978), the Kentucky Supreme Court held "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 regulation." See also
York v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 815 S.W.2d 415 (1991); KRS 26A.200 and KRS 26A.220; and 94-ORD-105.
In 97-ORD-119, we held that the failure of the court reporter for the Green Circuit Court to respond to an open records request for court records in the possession of the court reporter was not a violation of the Open Records Act, as records of the courts are not subject to the terms and provisions of the Act.
Accordingly, we conclude the court reporter for the Montgomery Circuit Court did not violate the terms and provisions of the Kentucky Open Records Act KRS 61.870 through KRS 61.884 are not applicable to the records of the court system. Such records are subject to the control and direction of the Kentucky Supreme Court.
Mr. Townsend's avenue for access to court records is through the court system. However, as noted above, Ms. Tipton indicated the transcripts in case 94-CR-00024 were being forwarded to him and that her office was in the process of preparing the transcripts in case 97-CR-00035 for Mr. Townsend's use.
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.