CPRA Request Denied Citing Open Investigation of Deceased Defendant

A public records request filed under the California Public Records Act (CPRA) was reportedly denied due to an "open investigation on a vandalism charge" involving a defendant who is deceased. The request, made by an individual identified as Lisa, pertains to civil discovery and highlights a complex legal situation. The vandalism charge was dated October 22, 2022, with the defendant's death occurring in December 2022.

The California Public Records Act (CPRA) is designed to ensure public access to government documents and information, promoting transparency and accountability. While the Act includes exemptions for ongoing investigations to protect their integrity, the denial in this specific case raises questions given the defendant's death. Such exemptions typically aim to prevent interference with active law enforcement efforts.

Legal experts suggest that an "open investigation" concerning a deceased individual, particularly when it is the sole basis for denying a public records request, presents an unusual scenario. Generally, criminal proceedings against a defendant terminate upon their death, which could impact the justification for withholding records under an "open investigation" exemption. The continuation of an investigation post-mortem would typically require specific legal grounds or be limited to broader systemic issues rather than individual prosecution.

Lisa's tweet directly questioned the denial, asking, "Are they suggesting I should file a lawsuit?" She also tagged prominent constitutional lawyer Harmeet K. Dhillon and Susan D. Reynolds, indicating a potential intent to seek legal counsel or draw attention to the matter. Ms. Dhillon is known for her work in civil liberties and public records litigation, often challenging government transparency issues.

The situation underscores ongoing debates regarding the scope of public records exemptions and the public's right to information, even in cases involving sensitive legal matters. The denial sets the stage for a potential legal challenge that could clarify the application of CPRA exemptions when a central figure in an investigation is no longer alive. This case could establish precedent for how public agencies handle similar requests moving forward.