Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, 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 Roederer Correctional Complex did not violate the Open Records Act in the disposition of Jeffery Craig's request for a copy of "information reports [and the EOR] for an incident on 3/20/09 involving c/o Troy Stansbury [and Mr. Craig that occurred] at 12:02 PM [and that were prepared by] c/o Troy Stansbury and c/o Troy Mattingly . . . ." Having received no response to his request, Mr. Craig initiated this appeal.
Upon receipt of notification of Mr. Craig's appeal, RCC responded to his allegations through Justice and Public Safety Staff Attorney Leigh K. Meredith. She advised that RCC's open records log did not indicate receipt of Mr. Craig's request. Consistent with the position we took in 09-ORD-066, we find that RCC did not violate KRS 61.880(1) in failing to respond to a request that was unsuccessfully transmitted to it. A copy of 09-ORD-066 is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
Turning to the substantive issues on appeal, we find that RCC properly disposed of Mr. Craig's request by releasing all existing records that were responsive to his request and notifying him that no additional responsive records exist. Ms. Meredith explained that no information report or extraordinary occurrence report was located at RCC, but that RCC furnished Mr. Craig with a copy of the disciplinary report relating to the incident. It is the decision of this office that 07-ORD-188, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is controlling on the issues presented. In the absence of a prima facie showing that additional responsive records exist, we are obligated under the rule announced in Bowling v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, 172 S.W.3d 333 (KY. 2005), as adopted in 07-ORD-188, to affirm RCC's position.
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.
Jeffery Craig, # 167066, D-3Tandy WellsLeigh K. Meredith