Narrative Opinion Summary
In January 2005, a newspaper sought a 911 tape from a county prosecutor related to a homicide investigation, invoking the Ohio Public Records Act. The prosecutor permitted the newspaper to listen to the tape but refused to provide a copy, prompting the newspaper to file for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the tape's release. The court ruled that 911 tapes are public records under Ohio law and must be disclosed immediately, emphasizing that these tapes are not protected by privacy concerns as they are not created for investigative purposes. The refusal to provide the tape in its original format, as maintained by the public office, violated Ohio Revised Code 149.43(B)(2). The court reaffirmed the precedence that requests for such records are not limited to transcriptions and that individuals are entitled to receive copies in the format held by the office. Consequently, the court granted the peremptory writ, ordering the tape's release at cost and awarding attorney fees to the newspaper due to the public benefit derived from their legal action and the respondents' failure to comply with the public records law.
Legal Issues Addressed
Award of Attorney Feessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court awarded attorney fees to the Dispatch, recognizing the public benefit of their action and respondents' noncompliance.
Reasoning: The court also emphasized that 911 tapes must be released immediately upon request, granting a peremptory writ for the Dispatch to receive the tape at cost and awarding attorney fees due to the public benefit established by the Dispatch and the respondents' noncompliance.
Entitlement to Copies of Audiotapessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reaffirmed that requests for audiotapes must be fulfilled by providing the actual tapes, not just transcriptions.
Reasoning: The court referenced precedent, stating that requests for audiotapes are not limited to transcriptions. It reaffirmed that Slagle, who needed the audiotape for trial preparation, is entitled to a copy, not just a transcript.
Expectation of Privacy in 911 Callssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The ruling specifies that there is no expectation of privacy for callers to 911, as the information is expected to be public.
Reasoning: The ruling emphasizes that 911 tapes are not created for investigative purposes, and there is no expectation of privacy for callers, who expect their information to be public.
Format of Public Recordssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that public offices must provide records in the format maintained by the office, and not just transcriptions.
Reasoning: Respondents failed to comply with R.C. 149.43(B)(2), which allows individuals requesting public records to obtain copies in the medium used by the public office.
Public Records under Ohio Lawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that 911 tapes qualify as public records that must be disclosed immediately upon request.
Reasoning: The court establishes that 911 tapes qualify as public records under Ohio law, requiring immediate disclosure upon request.