Innocence Project New Orleans v. New Orleans Police Department
129 So. 3d 668
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- The Innocence Project of New Orleans requested NOPD records concerning Bennie Brown (conviction final in 1993). The request was submitted Nov. 20, 2012.
- Superintendent Rònal Serpas, the custodian, failed to respond within the three-day statutory period and did not timely notify the requester of any legal basis for refusal.
- After repeated informal follow-ups, an assistant city attorney sent written notice 65 days later refusing production (except the initial report), citing exemptions.
- The Innocence Project sued for a writ of mandamus; at a summary hearing the custodian did not testify. The trial court granted the peremptory writ, ordered production, awarded attorney’s fees ($3,000), costs ($607), and $5,000 in civil penalties.
- Serpas did not appeal the mandamus/order to produce but appealed the awards; the appellate court affirmed the awards and penalties and declined to consider the Innocence Project’s request for sanctions against Serpas’s appeal because the Innocence Project failed to answer the appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether prevailing requester is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs under La. R.S. 44:35 D | Innocence Project: prevailing requester must receive fees/costs as statutory matter | Serpas: good-faith refusal should excuse fee/cost award | Court: Fees and costs are mandatory to prevailing requester; good faith is not an exception; award affirmed (de novo review) |
| Whether trial court properly imposed civil penalties for failure to timely notify under La. R.S. 44:35 E(1) | Innocence Project: Serpas’ unexplained delay was arbitrary/unreasonable and supports penalties | Serpas: (argued lack of merit; contested award of penalties and need for written reasons) | Court: Penalties discretionary; trial court did not abuse discretion in awarding $5,000 given 65-day delay and unexplained conduct; affirmed |
| Whether requested records were exempt from disclosure under La. R.S. 44:3 A(4)(a) (supplemental police reports) | Innocence Project: conviction final; public’s right favors disclosure of post‑conviction records | Serpas: supplemental reports remain exempt despite final conviction | Court: Custodian’s legal position rejected; final conviction makes records producible; mandamus properly issued (custodian did not contest writ) |
| Whether appellate court may award sanctions for a frivolous appeal when appellee did not answer | Innocence Project: Serpas’ appeal frivolous; seek damages | Serpas: N/A on this procedural point | Court: Appellee must answer an appeal to seek damages for frivolous appeal; Innocence Project failed to answer, so claim procedurally barred |
Key Cases Cited
- Lemmon v. Connick, 590 So.2d 574 (La. 1991) (final conviction opens police records to public inspection)
- Landis v. Moreau, 779 So.2d 691 (La. 2001) (doubts about access resolved in favor of public)
- State v. Chapman, 699 So.2d 504 (La. 1997) (defendants access district attorney files and supplemental police reports for postconviction relief)
- Trenticosta v. Mamoulides, 633 So.2d 786 (La. App. 4th Cir.) (supplemental reports disclosable where conviction final)