Privacy Rights of Arrestees Trump Disclosure of Their Addresses to the Public

By -

 Mott v. City and County of Honolulu (ICA January 30, 2020)

Background. The Honolulu Police Department keeps a daily arrest log known as a blotter. The log includes the name of the arrestee and his or her address. For years, HPD would provide a requesting member of the public blotter information containing the address. In 2017, HPD changed its policy and started to disclose only the adult arrest log, which did not include the address. Karen Mott wrote to HPD seeking disclosure of the blotter with the address. The request was denied. Mott filed a lawsuit seeking declaratory relief and an order compelling disclosure of the addresses. The City moved to dismiss the complaint. The circuit court, with the Hon. Judge Gary W. B. Chang presiding, granted the motion. Mott appealed.

 

The Uniform Information Practices Act Balances Open Government Against Invasion of Privacy. The State seeks to “conduct[] government business as openly as possible . . .tempered by a recognition of the right of the people to privacy[.]” HRS § 92F-2. The Uniform Information Practices Act requires that “[e]xcept as provided in section 92F-13, each agency upon request by any person shall make government records available for inspection and copying during regular business hours.” HRS § 92F-11(b). Disclosure is not required when it “constitute[s] a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy[.]” HRS § 92F-13(1).

 

However, disclosure is not a “clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the privacy interest of the individual.” “[O]nce a significant privacy interest is recognized, it must be balanced against the public interest in disclosure to determine whether disclosure of the information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Peer News LLC v. City & County of Honolulu, 138 Hawai'i 53, 68, 376 P.3d 1, 16 (2016).

 

Arrestees have a significant Privacy Interest in their Addresses. The ICA held that arrestees have a significant privacy interest in personal information such as their home addresses. The ICA relied on Peer News, which stated “there is no compelling public interest in the disclosure of . . . confidential personal information such as home addresses, dates of birth, social security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and bank account information. Such information, if present in relevant records, must be redacted.” Id. at 73, 376 P.3d at 21. The ICA also noted that the Office of Information Practices has concurred with the HSC in several opinion letters. See OPI Op. Ltr. No. 89-16; OIP Op. Ltr. 96-04; OIP Op. Ltr. 99-06; OIP Op. Ltr. 07-07. The ICA affirmed the dismissal of the case.

Comments

Graham said…
Is the use of the word "Trump" a tongue in cheek choice?
November 2, 2020 at 4:38 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HSC overrules a nine-month-old case and goes back to the bright-line rule to determine “custody” in custodial interrogation

By -
  State v. Hewitt (HSC March 15, 2023) Background. Hawai'i County Officer Chandler Nancio and another officer were called to the Kona Community Hospital in the middle of the night to see a possible victim of assault. An unknown man dropped Cyrina Hewitt off at the emergency room. He found Hewitt awake with contusions on her face, her eyes were swollen shut, a laceration was on her ear, and she had a broken breast plate. She was disoriented and “rambling incoherently.” She did not know where she was or why she as in the hospital.   Officer Nancio waited for the nurse to treat her and then asked for her name and birth date. He stayed at her bedside and asked her questions about how she got her injuries. Hewitt at first said she had pink-eye, but then said it was a stye. Then paramedics came by and asked what was going on. The paramedics said that they saw a truck’s taillights sticking out of the bushes on the side of the road.   Sgt. Mekia Rose followed up on the truck and
Read more

Judge accidentally strikes the entire expert opinion in a murder trial

By -
  State v. Sylva (HSC December 29, 2023) Background. Kumulipo Sylva was indicted for murder in the second degree after he was arrested for killing Eduardo Cerezo in the bathroom of the Queen Kaahumanu Shopping Center. Sylva raised the insanity defense and three examiners were appointed to determine penal responsibility. All three concluded that Sylva suffered from a physical or mental disease, disorder, or defect. Two out of the three believed he lacked capacity under the insanity defense was not criminally responsible.   At trial, the prosecution presented evidence that Cerezo and Kyle Keoho got on the bus in Pukalani when they saw Sylva on the bus. Cerezo called Sylva a “pussy” and threatened to beat him up. When the bus got to the shopping center, the three of them got off and Sylva challenged Cerezo to a fight. Cerezo said he did not want to fight and Sylva walked away from them.   Cerezo and Keoho went to the bathroom together. Sylva also went into the bathroom with a ca
Read more

Officer’s False Testimony Prompts New Trial Even Though it did not Pertain to the Defendant’s Guilt

By -
State v. Stone (HSC June 15, 2020) Background. Kentaru Stone was charged with promoting a dangerous drug in the third degree. The prosecution provided five Honolulu Police Department reports to the defense in discovery. The lead officer in the police investigation was HPD Officer Douglas Korenic II. The police department also has a “found property policy.” Property recovered after an arrest that does not belong to the arrestee is itemized and listed a “found property” for others to claim. The only found property report here was an iPhone. In the prosecution’s opening statement, the prosecutor said that Officer Korenic approached a man at a picnic table at Ala Moana Beach Park at 3:45 in the morning. He talked to the man “when all of a sudden the defendant makes a arm gesture. He uses his arm and he flicks away a small baggie, which Officer Korenic . . . recognizes this substance to possibly be crystal methamphetamine.” The defense posed an alternative theory. Counsel in her open
Read more