2009 May 5 - Texas Attorney General Decision To Houston Pd

A:rlctRNEY

oF Trxes

GREG ABtsOTT'

May 5, 2009

ivis. Candice ivi. Assistant Ci

City of P.

6uston. Texas 7700 1 -0368

oR2009-06000 Dear Ms. De La Garza:

to required public disclosure under the You ask whether certain information is subject jZ Code' Your request was public Infbrmahon Act (the "Act"), chapter S of the Government assigned ID# 342A24' eieven categories (the' departmeni") received a request fol The Houston Poiice Depafiment all rnisdemeanor and the department lari booking system regarding

of information from feionymarijuanalawviolationsdunngaspecifiedtrmgqlod.Youciaimther.equested oftheGovemmentcode' we informationtsexceptedfromdisclorur",,nd"'section552'101 ciaim' have considered the exception you

is subject to

a

previous determination issued

we note a portion ofthe requested information this office zooq-o :,qs Qoaq, In that decision, by this office in open Records LetterNo' submitted information under uny portion of ru1ed the department may not withhotJ 'h-t Youhavenotindicatedthefacts section552.10i inconjunctionwith.o*-o"-iu*privacy' prior ruling' Thus' with regard the issuance of this and circumstances have changed since and to the infonnation pre'iously requested to the requested information ihut i, identical ouf ru1ing in department must continue to leiy on ruied on by this office, we conclude the the as a previous detetmination and release 20a9-03745 No. Letter Records open No' 673 that decisio n' see open Records Decision information at issue in accordance with which prior ruling was based have not 1aw, facts, and circumstances on

(2001) (so long as is precisely exists where requested information changed, first type of previous determination is addlessed to in a prior attoffIey generai nrling' ruling same information as was addressed

Ms. Candice M. De La Garza - Pace 2

same govefilmental body, and ruling concludes that information is or is not excepted from disclosure). To the extent the requested information is not encompassed by the previous ruling, we will consider the submitted argument.

We must address the department's obligations under the Act. Section 552.301 of the Goverrment Code describes the procedural obligations placed on a goverrunentai body that receives a written request for information that it wishes to withhold. Pursuant to

section 552.301(e) of the Goverrunent Code, the governmental body is required to submit to this offlrce within fi{teen business days of receiving the request ( 1) generai written comments stating the reasons why the stated exceptions apply that would allow the information to be

withheld, (2) a copy of the written request for information, (3) a signed statement or sufficient evidence showing the date the governmental body received the wntten req uest. ancl (4) a copy of the specific information requested or representattve samples, iabeled to indicate which exceptions appiy to which parts of the documents . See Gov' tCode $ 5 52'3 0 i (e). The department received the request on February 75, 2009. As of this date, you have not submitted to this office arguments explaining why the stated exceptions apply or a copy or representative sampie of the remaining information requested. Consequently, we find the department failed to compi,v with the requirements of section 552'301. pursuant to section 5523A2 of the Government Code, a goveffImental body's failure to comply u,ith the requirements of section 552.30i results in the legai presumption that the requlsted infonnation is public and must be released uniess a compelling reason exists to withhold the information frorn disclosure. See id. $ 552.302; Hancoclr v. State Bd. o.f l^s.,797 S.W.2d 379,38i-82 (Tex. App.-Austin 1990, no writ) (govenrmental bodyruust make compelling demonstration to overcome presumption of openness pursuani to statutory predecessor to section 552.302;; Open Records Decision No. 319 (1982). Nonna11y, a compelling reason to rvithhoki information exists when some other source of law makes the information confidentiai or where third party interests are at stake. Open Records Decision No. i 50 at Z (1977). Although, you claim the requested information is excepted from
In

Ms. Can
3

in this request and limited This letter ruling is limited to the particular information at issue relied upon as a previous to the f'acts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be determination regarding any other information or any other circumstances' responsibilities of the This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and rights and gou"rn*"ntal body and of the requestor. Formore information concerning those iesponsibiiities, piease visit our website 31 ltttp:i'irvw'ur'.oas.state.tx.us'ropenlindex:ofi'PhP, free' or call the Office of the Attorney General's Open Govetnment Hotiine, tollpublic providing at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable charges for of the office of information under the Act must be directed io the cost Rules Administrator the Attorney General at (512) 475-2497 ' Sincerely,

Olivia A. Maceo Assistant AttorneY General Open Records Division

OM/ri

Ref:

lD# 342024

Enc.

Submitteddocuments Requestor (w/o enclosures)