In the case of Welsh-Huggins v. Jefferson Cty. Pros. Atty., 7th Dist. Jefferson No. 19 JE 0005, 2019-Ohio-3967, an Ohio appellate court held that security footage showing security vulnerabilities and emergency responses may constitute a security record exception to a public records request.
In this case, a reporter made numerous public records requests to a county prosecutor’s office for footage of a shooting that took place outside of a courthouse. The county prosecutor’s office denied the requests on the basis that the records requested were “security records” or “infrastructure records” under R.C. 149.433 and, thus, were excepted from public records requests. The reporter initiated a legal action to require disclosure of the footage in the Ohio Court of Claims. The Special Master assigned to the action held that the footage in question was a public record. The county prosecutor’s office appealed.
The Ohio appellate court held that the footage was not an “infrastructure record” but that it was a “security record” under R.C. 149.433 because evidence was produced that the footage showed the technical capabilities of the security camera and the response plan of the security forces at the court house. Thus, the Ohio appellate court held that footage was not subject to a public records request.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is always changing like the Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.