Post Conviction Proceeding Records Were Not Entirely Exempt Under FOIA

After an inmate submitted
several FOIA requests to a state’s attorney’s office (SAO) seeking records
regarding his pending post conviction proceeding, the SAO denied the request in its entirety based on the FOIA exemption that protects from release records that would interfere with a pending law enforcement proceeding.
The SAO argued that disclosing the records would interfere with a pending law
enforcement proceeding because the requester’s civil postconviction proceeding
was still pending at the time of receiving the FOIA requests. The
requester filed a lawsuit against the SAO alleging they improperly denied his
FOIA requests, and the circuit court ruled in favor of the SAO, finding that
disclosing the requested records to the requester would interfere with pending
law enforcement proceedings.

On appeal, the First District
Appellate Court reversed the circuit court, finding that the SAO did not prove
that all of its responsive records were exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Taylor
v. Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office.

First, the Appellate Court rejected
the requester’s argument that the circuit court incorrectly treated his civil
postconviction proceeding as a law enforcement proceeding, finding that civil
postconviction proceedings do fall within the scope of Section 7(1)(d)(i) of FOIA (the pending law enforcement proceedings exemption).

Nevertheless, the Appellate Court
determined that the SAO improperly withheld the responsive records under that exemption. Although an affidavit from the SAO’s FOIA officer
stated that its responsive records were entirely exempt because disclosure would interfere with a pending postconviction
proceeding, the Appellate Court determined that the affidavit was insufficient because it was conclusory and did not
specifically explain which records were exempt from disclosure, and why the
records were categorically exempt from disclosure. It is important to note that the Appellate Court held that the pendency of a postconviction petition, in and of itself, was not sufficient to entirely exempt records under the cited exemption.

The Appellate Court ordered the SAO to either disclose the
responsive records or justify withholding its responsive
records by preparing an index and a detailed
affidavit explaining why disclosing each document would interfere with or harm
pending or prospective law enforcement proceedings

Post Authored by Eugene Bolotnikov, Ancel Glink