MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Abdullah R. Muhammad (Frank Clifford) v. Office of the District Attorney - Hampden District (SPR 20171757)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Appeal closed · Filed 12-22-2017

ClosedAppealResolved

SPR 20171757 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Abdullah R. Muhammad (Frank Clifford) concerning records held by Office of the District Attorney - Hampden District, opened 12-22-2017. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Appeal closed.

Case Details

Case Number
20171757
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Abdullah R. Muhammad (Frank Clifford)
Custodian
Office of the District Attorney - Hampden District
Date Opened
12-22-2017
Date Closed
01-09-2018
Date Request Submitted
11-16-2017
Petitions Regarding Fees
No
Went to Court
No

PDF Document

Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records January 9, 2018 SPR17/1757 Joseph P. Pessolano, Esq. Assistant District Attorney Office of the District Attorney - Hampden District 30 State Street Springfield, MA O1 102 Dear Attorney Pessolano: I have received the petition of Abdullah R. Muhammad (Frank Clifford) appealing the response of the Office of the District Attorney-Hampden District (DAO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 1O A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1 ). Specifically, Mr. Muhammad . requested "a copy of [ an identified individual's] case files" and "any and all information within [the DAO's] possession" regarding an identified individual and series of events. Unsatisfied with the DAO's response, Mr. Muhammad petitioned this office and this appeal was open as a result. Prior appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPRl 7 /1427 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) (October 20, 2017). In the October 20th determination, the Supervisor ordered the DAO to provide Mr. Muhammad with a response indicating whether the DAO possesses any records responsive to the request and a reasonable description of the records. The DAO provided a November 16th response which explained that the DAO has retrieved the responsive file from the archives facility. In its response, the DAO listed each of the records or categories of records contained in the file which are specific to Mr. Muhammad's personal history. The DAO informed Mr. Muhammad that while the records are restricted under the Public Records Law by the Criminal Offender Record Information Act, Mr. Muhammad has a unique right of access to his file through the judicial process. A review of the November 16th response reveals that the file is specific to Mr. Muhammad because it stems from his arrest under the alias, "Ike Cooper." One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us

Joseph P. Pessolano, Esq. SPR17/1757 Page 2 January 9, 2018 Purpose of the request; identity of the requester Please note that the reason for which a requester seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requester. See Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Accordingly, Mr. Muhammad's purpose i~ making the request has no bearing on the public status of the responsive file. I also note that the discovery process and the Public Records Law are two distinct and independent avenues for gaining access to records. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has held that while a party's access to records may be limited by the Public Records Law, this may not preclude obtaining the records through discovery. Commonwealth v. Wanis, 426 Mass. 639 (1998). Conclusion Mr. Muhammad should be advised that the appeal process under the Public Records Law shall not apply to records in which an individual, or a representative of the individual, has a unique right of access to the records through statutory, regulatory, judicial or other applicable means. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1)(a). Whereas the records are directly related to Mr. Muhammad's conviction, he has a unique right of access through the judicial process. Accordingly, I decline to continue any further review of Mr. Muhammad's petition. This appeal is closed and Mr. Muhammad is encouraged to seek the records through other means. If Mr. Muhammad is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of applicable judicial remedies). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Abdullah Muhammad (Frank Clifford)