Doe, Q. v. Worcester County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20260401)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 19, 2026 SPR26/0401 Mark Relation, Esq. Assistant District Attorney, Fugitive Unit 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 Quantreil Laura appealing the response of the Worcester 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 January 27, 2026, Mr. Laura requested “a complete copy of the criminal complaint and all related charging documents filed in Case No. 2362CR003185, Defendant: [a named individual] (No Consent to Jurisdiction / Defendant–in-Name-Only).” The Office responded on February 4, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Mr. Laura petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR26/0401, 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(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. 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. SPR26/0401 Page 2 February 19, 2026 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. The Office’s February 4th Response In its February 4, 2026 response, the Office states the following: The District Attorney’s Office has received your public records request for records relating to case 2362CR003185. The District Attorney’s Office is unable to provide the requested documents at this time as public records because the criminal case is open and pending, meaning that the requested documents constitute discovery materials. When public record requests are made during the course of open criminal cases, “discovery should follow normal procedures in criminal cases where its availability lies in the discretion of the trial judge under standards developed by this court.” Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976); see G.L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a). Once the criminal case has been closed, this office will review any materials related to your request and fulfill your request to the extent possible under the public record law. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Laura argues the following: The denial . . . asserts that the requested records are unavailable because the criminal case is “open and pending” and therefore constitute discovery. This assertion is both legally deficient and factually unsupported. A criminal matter cannot be lawfully deemed “open and pending” in the absence of probable cause or evidence of an actual crime. Where charges are initiated or maintained without probable cause, through fabricated reports, material misrepresentations, or other unlawful acts, the resulting proceedings are void ab initio. An unlawful prosecution cannot be used as a predicate to suspend statutory rights of access under the Public Records Law. Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor:

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR26/0401 Page 3 February 19, 2026 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. This office has reviewed the docket of the trial court and verified that the requested records are the subject of active and ongoing litigation in Worcester District Court. See Commonwealth v. Quantreil Korey Laura, Worcester District Court Docket No. 2362CR003185 (July 14, 2023). In light of the pending litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Additionally, I decline to opine on the applicability of Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to the requested records. Please note that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Quantreil Laura