← Back to Search
Ava Berger v. Suffolk County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20242395)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 08-22-2024
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20242395 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Ava Berger concerning records held by Suffolk County District Attorney's Office, opened 08-22-2024. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20242395
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Ava Berger
- Date Opened
- 08-22-2024
- Date Closed
- 09-05-2024
- Response Provided Date
- 10-28-2024
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Time to Comply
- 37 Business Days
- Went to Court
- No
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 5, 2024 SPR24/2395 Caleigh Durkin Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office One Bullfinch Place Boston, MA 02114 Dear Ms. Durkin: I have received the petition of Ava Berger appealing the response of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 8, 2024, Ms. Berger requested, “the most up-to-date (July of 2024) Suffolk District Attorney’s office Law Enforcement Automatic Discovery list or Brady list, and all documents related to this list.” The Office responded on July 23, 2024. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Berger petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/2395, 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 agency or municipality 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(d)(iv) (written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based…”); 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). If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be 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 Caleigh Durkin SPR24/2395 Page 2 September 5, 2024 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. The Office’s July 28th Response In its July 28, 2024 response, the Office cited the Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) Act under Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, to redact the responsive records. Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Berger states, “I am writing to appeal the effective denial of a public records request I made to the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office on July 8… On July 23, I received a partially redacted 22-page record from the agency…” Exemption (a) Exemption (a), known as the statutory exemption, permits the withholding of records that are: specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a). A governmental entity may use the statutory exemption as a basis for withholding requested materials where the language of the exempting statute relied upon expressly or necessarily implies that the public’s right to inspect records under the Public Records Law is restricted. See Att’y Gen. v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 154 (1979); Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. v. Appeals Court, 372 Mass. 539, 545-546 (1977). This exemption creates two categories of exempt records. The first category includes records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. Such statutes expressly state that such a record either “shall not be a public record,” “shall be kept confidential” or “shall not be subject to the disclosure provision of the Public Records Law.” The second category under the exemption includes records deemed exempt under statute by necessary implication. Such statutes expressly limit the dissemination of particular records to a defined group of individuals or entities. A statute is not a basis for exemption if it merely lists individuals or entities to whom the records are to be provided; the statute must expressly limit access to the listed individuals or entities. Criminal Offender Record Information The current definition of CORI is as follows: Caleigh Durkin SPR24/2395 Page 3 September 5, 2024 “Criminal offender record information,” records and data in any communicable form compiled by a Massachusetts criminal justice agency which concern an identifiable individual and relate to the nature or disposition of a criminal charge, an arrest, a pre-trial proceeding, other judicial proceedings, previous hearings conducted pursuant to section 58A of chapter 276 where the defendant was detained prior to trial or released with conditions under subsection (2) of section 58A of chapter 276, sentencing, incarceration, rehabilitation, or release. Such information shall be restricted to information recorded in criminal proceedings that are not dismissed before arraignment. Criminal offender record information shall not include evaluative information, statistical and analytical reports and files in which individuals are not directly or indirectly identifiable, or intelligence information. Criminal offender record information shall be limited to information concerning persons who have attained the age of 18 and shall not include any information concerning criminal offenses or acts of delinquency committed by any person before he attained the age of 18; provided, however, that if a person under the age of 18 was adjudicated as an adult in superior court or adjudicated as an adult after transfer of a case from a juvenile session to another trial court department, information relating to such criminal offense shall be criminal offender record information. Criminal offender record information shall not include information concerning any offenses which are not punishable by incarceration. G. L. c. 6, § 167. In its response, the Office merely cites Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law without any explanation of its applicability to the responsive records. The Office must provide additional information regarding how the redacted information is exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Law. Any non-exempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). Upon review, it is unclear how the records requested fall within the definition of CORI. Specifically, it is not clear how the records constitute “information recorded in criminal proceedings that are not dismissed before arraignment.” See G. L. c. 6, § 167. The Office must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Berger with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (10) business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Caleigh Durkin SPR24/2395 Page 4 September 5, 2024 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Ava Berger