← Back to Search
Ravinder Maan v. Worcester County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20220992)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Administratively closed · Filed 04-28-2022
ClosedAppealResolved
SPR 20220992 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Ravinder Maan concerning records held by Worcester County District Attorney's Office, opened 04-28-2022. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Administratively closed.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20220992
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Ravinder Maan
- Date Opened
- 04-28-2022
- Date Closed
- 05-09-2022
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 May 9, 2022 SPR22/0992 Mark Relation, Esq. Records Access Officer Worcester County District Attorney’s Office 225 Main Street, G301 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Relation: I have received the petition of Ravinder Maan appealing the response of the Worcester County District Attorney’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 27, 2022, the requestor sought a copy of a certain guilty plea that includes the exact quantity of marijuana at issue in the plea. The Office provided a response on April 27, 2022. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/0992, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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 Mark Relation, Esq. SPR22/0992 Page 2 May 9, 2022 The Office’s April 27th Response In its April 27, 2022 response, the Office stated, “unfortunately, at this time we are unable to locate any records relating to the requested file in our possession, custody, and control and so cannot satisfy your public records request.” Current Appeal In the current appeal, the requestor stated, “we are seeking confirmation of the exact number [in grams of marijuana that a certain individual pled guilty to possessing].” No Duty to Create Records In a telephone call between the Office and a staff attorney in this Division, the Office indicated that it does not contain records with an exact quantity of marijuana. Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Conclusion Where the Office does not possess any records responsive to the requestor’s requests, and has no duty to create records responsive to the requests, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If the requestor 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, § 10(b). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Mark Relation, Esq.