Sharkey, Kyle v. Office of the Commissioner of Probation (SPR 20260857)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 24, 2026 SPR26/0857 Tonie Ryan, Esq. Deputy Commissioner – Legal Counsel Office of the Commissioner of Probation 1 Ashburton Place, Room 405 Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney Ryan: I have received the petition of Kyle Sharkey appealing the response of the Office of the Commissioner of Probation (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 11, 2026, Mr. Sharkey requested the following: [1] Documents of a Judge presiding over a case and requesting or scheduling an Ex Parte meeting with a probation officer in his or her office. How many and between which Judge and Probation officer[;] [2] Documents of a Judge not presiding over a case and requesting or scheduling an Ex Parte meeting with a probation officer in his or her office. How many and between which Judge and Probation officer[;] [3] Documents relating to Judge [an identified individual] complaint against ACPO [an identified individual] arising from CW vs [an identified individual][;] [4] Documents relating to Judge [an identified individual] complaint against any other Probation Officer[;] [5] Copy of all notes taken during these meetings[.] [6] Date-Sept 10, 2025. Time of Day for footage [an identified individual] should be able to provide a good faith estimate. I would like to request a Copy of Security Footage showing Judge [an identified individual] entering and exiting the Probation Office where [an identified individual] had the meeting. Best from a camera that does not invade personal privacy or safety concerns. If other individuals are on the footage who are not government officials I am already anticipating you will have to blur the faces of the unknown individuals for the very short time period of entering and exiting. The Office responded on February 19, 2026. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Sharkey petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0857, was opened as a result. 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

Tonie Ryan, Esq. SPR26/0857 Page 2 March 24, 2026 The Office’s February 19th Response In its February 19, 2026 response, the Office stated, This reply email is in response to your emailed request under the Public Records Law for purported communications between a Superior Court judge and one or more Probation Officers. If any such communication exists, it would not be considered a public record under G.L. c. 66, § 10. The judiciary’s records are not included in the definition of public records within the Massachusetts Public Records law. G.L. c. 4, § 7, 26th clause; Lambert v. Executive Director of the Judicial Nominating Council, 425 Mass. 406, 409 (1997); see also 950 CMR 32.02 (excluding judiciary from definition of “governmental entity” for purposes of access to public records); Kettenbach v. Board of Bar Overseers, 448 Mass. 1019, 1020-1021 (2007) (“Under these regulations, the public records law applies to only one of the three branches of government, namely, the executive branch.”) Please note, the Office of the Supervisor of Records is statutorily empowered with the authority to determine the public record status of government records. G. L. c. 66, § 10. “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form, made or received by any officer or employee of any department of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). In examining this definition, and the separation of powers doctrine, the Supreme Judicial Court has concluded that the Public Records Law does not apply to records of the judiciary. Ann K. Lambert v. Executive Director of the Judicial Nominating Council, 425 Mass. 406, 409 (1997); see also Mass. Const. Pt. 1, Art. 30 (separation of powers). Where the records of the judiciary are not subject to the Public Records Law, this Division is unable to assist you in this matter. See Kettenbach v. Board of Bar Overseers, 448 Mass. 1019, 1020 (2007). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kyle Sharkey