Name & Badge Number Please.

How to Obtain Police Identity Under The California P

ublic Records Act.
By Darren Chaker
The California Public Records Act allows people to obtain various types of infor
mation, including police officer name and rank. Police sometimes reject such req
uests by intertwining the request for name and rank information with 'personnel
records.' As the below article articulates, full name and rank information is no
t a personnel record and subject to the Public Records Act.
A simple scenario plays out each day in California. The need arises to obtain th
e name(s) of police who went to a call. For whatever reason, a citizen wants to
know who went to the call, contacts dispatch, and simply makes the request what
officers went to a specific call. The dispatcher declines the request, as does t
he police station supervisor. Thus, absent a subpoena, the option to obtain off
icer name may be obtained without filing a lawsuit through a public records act
request.
The California Public Records Act (“Act”). The Act requires that local and state ag
encies make their public records available for inspection. (Govt. Code § 6253.)
A "public record" is defined as "any writing containing information relating to
the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, or retained by any s
tate or local agency[.]" (Govt. Code § 6252, subd. (e).) The definition is broad a
nd "' intended to cover every conceivable kind of record that is involved in the
governmental process[.]' " (San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior Court (1983) 143 C
al.App.3d 762, 774, quoting § 6252, subd. (e).)
The public has a vital interest in understanding and evaluating a police departm
ent’s response to an alleged crime and the manner it handles the call. The public
retains the right to know the name and rank of all officers who responded and th
e roles they played in order to evaluate the department’s response, verify that th
e department complied with its own policies and procedures, determine if the dep
artment’s response conformed to best practices, and suggest changes to policies an
d procedures in responding to future similar incidents. The public also has a si
gnificant interest in verifying that officers deployed to respond to a potential
crime and suggesting how such training might be improved.
Names and ranks of police officers are not automatically exempt from public disc
losure. Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training v. Superior Court (20
07) 42 Cal.4th 278. “Law enforcement officers carry upon their shoulders the cloak
of authority to enforce the laws of the state. In order to maintain trust in it
s police department, the public must be kept fully informed of the activities of
its peace officers.” Id. at 297.
The Attorney General recently concluded “the name of a peace officer involved in a
critical incident is not categorically exempt from disclosure” under the CPRA or
Penal Code. Opinion No. 07-208, 91 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 11. The Attorney General
specifically noted “a request just for the names of officers involved in a partic
ular incident may be provided without revealing any investigatory or disciplinar
y matter that may have arisen out of the incident.” Ibid. The “identities of officer
s involved in a particular incident that occurred in the course and scope of the
ir duties as peace officers is clearly information related ‘to the conduct of the
public’s business’” and is subject to disclosure if “it is recorded in any manner and ca
n be redacted to protect any confidential material.” Ibid. The officers’ identities
may be withheld only if the government can carry its heavy burden to prove “the pu
blic interest served by not disclosing the record clearly outweighs the public i
nterest served by disclosure of the record.” Ibid. (quoting Govt. Code, § 6255(a).)
For example, that narrow exception might apply to an undercover officer or an in
cident involving a street gang and the prospect of retribution by the gang. Ibid
. However, the exception cannot apply indiscriminately to any incident in which
an officer is involved.
The request is not a request for personnel records. The definition of “personnel r
ecords” in Penal Code Section 832.7 is provided in Section 832.8, and Section 832.
8 does not specifically refer to records of officer training. Records that “do not
reflect any of the items enumerated” in section 832.8 are not exempt from disclos
ure under Section 832.7. International Federation of Professional and Technical
Engineers, Local 21, AFL-CIO v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 319, 346.
If police determine that any or all or the information qualifies for an exemptio
n from disclosure, then ask whether, as is normally the case under the Act, the
exemption is discretionary, and if so whether it is necessary in this case to ex
ercise the departments’ discretion to withhold the information.
Furthermore, if the police department determines that some but not all of the in
formation is exempt from disclosure and that police intend to withhold it, reque
st that police redact it for the time being and make the rest available as reque
sted. In any event, ask police to please provide a signed notification citing th
e legal authorities on which you rely if you determine that any or all of the in
formation is exempt and will not be disclosed. Typically, public record request
s are handled by the City Attorney for municipal police or County Counsel for th
e Sheriff.
Additionally, an agency has 10 days to decide if copies will be provided. In "un
usual" cases (request is "voluminous," seeks records held off-site, OR requires
consultation with other agencies), the agency may upon written notice to the req
uestors give itself an additional 14 days to respond. (Govt. Code §6253(c)) These
time periods may not be used solely to delay access to the records. (Govt. Code §
6253(d)) As such, the police cannot delay its reply, since these records should
be readily available since this is the manner a member of the public is to be a
ware how to stay in compliance with the law. If any of the requested items do n
ot exist ask the police to please state such when you reply.
Of course, it is best to consult with counsel concerning the request, and if don
e on your own, always be courteous and respectful of police. Since strict time l
ines apply for police, or any public agency to respond to a CPRA request, it is
advisable to send the request by certified mail, FedEx, UPS, etc. and any commun
ication is made in writing.