Constitutional Law

N.M. court: Complaints against police must be released

By By The Associated Press

SANTA FE, N.M. ? Citizen complaints brought against police are subject to public disclosure, according to a state Court of Appeals ruling that reinforces a New Mexico sunshine law granting access to government records.

The court ruled this week against the state Department of Public Safety, which refused to release complaints against one of its law enforcement officers on grounds that they were confidential personnel records.

In a unanimous ruling, the court disagreed and said the complaints were not covered by exceptions in the Inspection of Public Record Act that provide for the confidentiality of "matters of opinion in personnel files" and "letters of reference concerning employment."

At issue was a public-records request filed by a former captain with the state Motor Transportation Police Division, Charles Cox, who was fired in 2005 for making a racist comment about a black patrolman and for discrimination against a female employee.

In 2006, Cox requested complaints that citizens had brought against the patrolman. Cox sued the department for withholding the records and he contended his firing was retaliation for exercising his right to free speech. A federal court ruled against Cox's free-speech lawsuit but sent the public-records dispute to state court.

The appeals court's Aug. 16 ruling is an important victory for open government, according to Cindi Pearlman of Tijeras, Cox's lawyer.

"Democracy only works when citizens know what the government is doing. Many police departments across the country have tried to resist letting citizens know when cops have complaints filed against them by other citizens. This is your classic blue wall of silence," Pearlman said.

Police are public servants, she said, and "if we don't know what they are doing and how they are carrying out their duties, we are really left in the dark about how our government is operating."

The department did not respond to requests for comment on the ruling or on whether the agency would ask the state Supreme Court to review it.

The appeals court's ruling reversed a decision by a state district court in Santa Fe, which had agreed with the department that citizen complaints should be kept confidential.

"While citizen complaints may lead DPS to investigate the officer's job performance and could eventually result in disciplinary action, this fact by itself does not transmute such records into 'matters of opinion in personnel files.' Additionally, the complaints at issue relate solely to the officer's official interactions with a member of the public and do not contain personal information regarding the officer other than his name and duty location," the appeals court said in an opinion by Judge Linda Vanzi.

The court said the department, before publicly disclosing a citizen complaint, may need to redact personal information about the person who filed it.

The department's motor-transportation officers conduct safety and hazardous materials inspections on commercial trucks, but also enforce traffic and drug laws.

Full post as published by First Amendment Center on August 19, 2010 (boomark / email).