State Records Committee Appeal 94-01
KARL WILLIAM WINSNESS, vs.
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
DECISION AND ORDER, CASE NO. 94-01
By this appeal, Appellant, Karl William Winsness seeks an order compelling Salt Lake City Corporation to release to him any records the City has that constitute police governing "no knock - no announce warrants," "high risk arrests and searches," and "major incident responses."
Appellant, Karl William Winsness, was informed in writing by the Committee that he had a right to appear before the Committee in person, by representative or through written statement or in all or any combination of those means of appearing. Appellant submitted written statements, but did not appear personally or through a representative at the hearing of January 19, 1994.
Appellee appeared through counsel, Frank M. Nakamura, at the January 19, 1994 hearing and submitted written comment, oral testimony through a witness, and oral argument. The State Records Committee, having reviewed the written materials submitted by the parties, and having heard the testimony and argument, now issues the following decision and order.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION
1. The Appellee, Salt Lake City Corporation, does not have any records constituting police policy governing "no knock - no announce warrants," "high risk arrests and searches," or "major incident responses." Appellee relies on applicable sections of the Utah Code, which is a public document, for guidance in the areas of activity that are the subject of Appellant's request. Appellant cannot provide something it does not have.
2. Appellant does have some written policies regarding general arrest procedures for police officials, which are public and which Appellee has volunteered to send to Appellant for whatever benefit they may be to Appellant.
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT the decision of Salt Lake City Corporation is sustained and the appeal is denied.
RIGHT TO APPEAL
Either party may appeal this Decision and Order to district court. The petition for review must be filed no later than 30 days after the date of this order. The petition for judicial review must be a complaint. The complaint and the appeals process are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and by Utah Code Ann. 63-2-404 & 502(7) (1992). The court is required to make its decision de novo. In order to protect its rights on appeal, a party may wish to seek advice from an attorney.
Entered this 21st day of January, 1994.
MAX J. EVANS,
Chairman, State Records Committee.