December 26, 2002; Kandiyohi County
12/26/2002 10:15:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:On November 15, 2002, IPAD received a letter from X. In this letter, X asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding his/her right to gain access to certain data maintained by the Kandiyohi County Sheriff. In response to X's request, IPAD, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Don Kujawa, Kandiyohi County Sheriff. The purposes of this letter, dated December 3, 2002, were to inform him of X's request and to ask him to provide information or support for the County Sheriff's position. On December 16, 2002, IPAD received a response from Kevin Kleinschmidt, Kandiyohi County Assistant Jail Administrator. A summary of the facts of this matter follows. According to X: I was serving a sentence for a probation violation. The Judge granted me Huber Release. Therefore, as required I wrote him directly asking that my extra hours of employment be approved and if I could attend my aftercare sessions and go to my regular AA meetings. Two weeks prior to starting my sentence my probation officer, Judy Tebeest, called and informed me that the Judge had faxed her a [sic] approval of my request, she then stated that she would fax it over to the jail Programs Directors, whom I have know [sic] by first names, Jon and Linda. I asked to view my file while at the jail, because they denied me AA meetings and caused some problems with my employer. I specifically asked to see the letter from the Judge. I was denied access and no reason was given. After X's release, X met with the Sheriff and the jail administrator in August of 2002, and again requested access to the letter. According to X, the jail administrator stated that he would contact X within the week. To date, I have received no response . . . . X also stated that the letter is missing from his/her file at the County Court Administration Office. In his comments to the Commissioner, Mr. Kleinschmidt stated: There was no written request to have a formal viewing of [X's] file. In one instance our Program Director does recall [X] verbally requesting to see a specific letter stating from the Judge that [X] has been approved for additional work hours at [X's] employment. The reason this request was not fulfilled is that there was no letter from the Judge approving [X] for additional work hours. [X] was informed that there was no such letter signed by the Judge, this is the reason why it was not provided to [X]. Mr. Kleinschmidt stated that the fact that the letter was missing from the court file would explain why we do not have a copy of this letter. Access cannot be denied to information we do not have. Issue:In his/her request for an opinion, X asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.85, corrections and detention data are defined as data on individuals created, collected, used or maintained because of their lawful confinement or detainment in state reformatories, prisons, and correctional facilities, municipal or county jails, lockups, work houses, work farms and all other correctional and detention facilities. Section 13.85 classifies various data as public, private or confidential. X is entitled to gain access to any public or private data the County maintains about him/her. The Commissioner does not know the specific content of letter. However, it isn't likely that there would be any confidential data, as defined in subdivision 3, in a letter written by X to a judge, or the judge's written comments on that letter. If the County maintained the letter in question, X would be entitled to gain access to it, assuming it does not contain confidential data. However, according to Mr. Kleinschmidt, the Sheriff does not have the letter, or a copy of it. X stated that his/her probation officer told X that she had received a copy from the judge, and planned to fax it to County jail staff. In general, under the rules governing public access to court records, X should be able to get a copy of the letter from the court. However, according to X, the letter is missing from the court file. Therefore, the Commissioner suggests that X contact the probation officer or the judge to request another copy. The Commissioner cannot resolve the factual disagreement between X and the County Sheriff regarding whether X was told that the Sheriff did not have a copy of the letter. It is helpful in situations like these if the government entity relies on its written data access policies and procedures, per section 13.05, subdivision 8, and documents its actions, as it is required to do under section 15.17. If the County had made a written record of its response to X, it might be possible to sort out what occurred. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by X is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: December 26, 2002 |
Response to data requests
Corrections and detention data (13.85)
Court records (See also: Judicial branch)
Data subject rights of access procedures (13.05, subd. 8)/(13.025, subd. 3)
