To return to this list after selecting an opinion, click on the "View entire list" link above the opinion title.
October 1, 2003; Minnesota Department of Public Safety
10/1/2003 10:14:43 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 September 4, 2003, IPAD received a letter, dated same, from Laurie Beyer-Kropuenske, General Counsel for the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. In her letter, Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding the classification of certain data maintained by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), a division of the Department. IPAD staff requested additional information, which Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske provided on September 23, 2003. A summary of the facts is as follows. In her September 23, 2003, letter, Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske wrote: As I mentioned in my September 4th letter, MRAP [the Minnesota Repository of Arrest Photos] was developed by the BCA to assist Minnesota law enforcement agencies in their efforts to comply with Minn. Stat. 299C.10, 299C.11 and 299C.145. In the past, law enforcements agency [sic] complied with these statutory provisions by making two hard copies of the arrest photo and booking data. One set of the paper photo and information was retained at the local originating agency and the other set was mailed to the [BCA]. With the advancement of technology, the originating agency [sic] are now able to take, store and send digital photographs and electronic copies of the same information that was previously submitted by in [sic] paper format. The new technology provides law enforcement with the ability to query the database based on any of the data elements in an attempt to locate persons matching a certain suspect's description. Under the paper system, a law enforcement agency would have to already know the name of the person whose photo they sought to retrieve from the BCA. The paper system did not provide the ability for an agency to conduct a general search for persons with similar descriptions. It is the position of the BCA and the [Department] that data contained in MRAP continues to be classified as private data under Minn. Stat. 13.87 Subd. 1(a). The transmission and storage of the data in an electronic versus paper format should not alter the classification of the data in the possession of the BCA . When MN Stat. 13.87 Subd. 1(a) was drafted, it was based on the former paper system which included a photograph along with arrest and identification data needed to tie a photograph to the arrest and booking of a specific person on a specific date for a certain criminal offense. As I mentioned above, the advancement of technology allows new identification data such as facial recognition to be created. MRAP merely represents a different medium for transmission and storage of data classified under MN stat. 13.87.... In her September 23, 2003, letter, Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske provided a list of the types of data contained in the MRAP. It includes the following: name; address; date of birth; gender; race; height; weight; eye color; hair color; facial hair; state identification number; driver's license number; social security number; FBI identification number; glasses; crime; originating agency incident number; control number assigned to originating agency; date of booking; booking number; any identification number assigned by local agency; image of face, scar, mark or tattoo; description of scar, mark or tattoo; code to designate a scar, mark, or tattoo, internal code number; agency; region; date photo taken; facial recognition information; record sealed by court order; exclude from line-up; image type; view number; pose; offset number; photo description; and computer code path information needed to connect photo file to identification data. Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske stated: Under the old paper system, originating agencies would send as much information as they had on a suspect being booked, such as the suspect's address, aliases, etc. Similarly, MRAP allows an agency to enter as much data as they have on the suspect. Accordingly, the number of data elements contained in a MRAP file will vary. Due to the electronic nature of MRAP and advancement of technology, some additional data are created/collected such as facial recognition data, image type and numerical value of how well the subject's face is centered in the photographic image. Issue:In her request for an opinion, Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, all government data are public unless otherwise classified. Section 13.87, subdivision 1(b), states, Criminal history data maintained by agencies, political subdivisions and statewide systems are classified as private, pursuant to section 13.02, subdivision 12... Subdivision 1(a) of section 13.87 defines criminal history data as all data maintained in criminal history records compiled by the [BCA] and disseminated through the criminal justice information system, including, but not limited to fingerprints, photographs, identification data, arrest data, prosecution data, criminal court data, custody and supervision data. The Commissioner agrees with the Department's position as stated by Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske. By enacting section 13.87, the Legislature classified photographs and other identifying data in criminal history records compiled by the BCA as private data. The fact that the photographs and other identifying data now are being transmitted electronically rather than by paper, and that the data exist in a database rather than in file cabinets, does not change the classification of the data. Therefore, the data in the MRAP are private. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue that Ms. Beyer-Kropuenske raised is as follows:
Signed:
Brian J. Lamb
Dated: October 1, 2003 |
Electronic data
Criminal history/justice data (13.87)
Electronic data
