Coulter v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
No. 2358 C.D. 2011
June 14, 2012
The Commonwealth Court decided that the character of a record — either a public document or a record exempt from the Right to Know Law (“RTKL”) — does not change simply because an agency previously released some of the requested information to a third party.
Background
Jean Coulter, currently on parole, submitted a RTKL request to the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole seeking “home plan” records concerning her release and residences at which she sought to live.
The board denied the request, citing a Pennsylvania statute that makes records in the custody of the board on matters concerning a parolee “private, confidential, and privileged.”
Coulter appealed to the OOR, which agreed with the board.
Coulter then appealed to the Commonwealth Court, arguing that the records should be disclosed to her because the board had released some of the same information to other people as part of its review of her home plan.
Commonwealth Court decision
Coulter argued that after releasing the records to a third party, the board is precluded from asserting that the home plans are not subject to disclosure. In other words, she argued that the board cannot claim the records are private, confidential, and privileged because the board already released the records to a third party.
The court disagreed, holding that the character of the records, either public or private, did not change simply because the agency had released some information to make its decisions on Coulter’s home plan.
As the court explained, if all home plans were considered public records, they would be open to the entire public, not just the person seeking parole. In any event, the court noted that the home plan records would be exempt under the RTKL’s non-criminal investigation exception.