FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Roger Pahl,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-8

 

Reports and Records Division, State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police,

 

                        Respondent                  July 11, 1990

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 30, 1990, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.  The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter dated December 28, 1989, the complainant requested a certified copy of any police report written by Trooper Krause, badge #985, with respect to a ticket issued in East Hartford, Connecticut by Trooper Krause to the complainant on October 19, 1989.

 

            3.  By letter filed with this Commission on January 8, 1990, the complainant appealed the respondent's denial of his request by reason of a non-response.

 

            4.  The complainant claims that he first became aware of the record identified in paragraph 2, above, when he saw a state's attorney holding a piece of paper that appeared to contain a paragraph concerning the events identified in paragraph 2, above, which record he now seeks.

 

            5.  The complainant also claims that based upon the paper he saw in the custody of the state's attorney, he believes that the respondent has such a record.

 

            6.  It is found that the respondent made a diligent search for a record as identified in paragraphs 2 and 4, above, but was unable to locate such.

 

Docket #FIC 90-8                               Page 2

 

            7.  It is also found that while a copy of the infraction issued to the complainant was produced by the respondent, as a matter of the respondent's policy, separate reports are not generally made on such infractions.

            8.  It is concluded that the respondent is not in possession of a record as described in paragraphs 2 and 4, above.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

 

            1.  The complaint is hereby dismissed.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 11, 1990.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 90-8                               Page 3

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

 

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

ROGER PAHL

5 Bassett Street, Apt. B1

West Haven, CT 06516

 

REPORTS AND RECORDS DIVISION, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF STATE POLICE

c/o Margaret Quilter Chapple, Esquire

Assistant Attorney General

MacKenzie Hall

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission