215 So. 3d 737
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- In 1998 Darnell Lewis was convicted of armed robbery and attempted second-degree murder; sentences affirmed on direct appeal.
- Lewis (pro se, incarcerated) filed a mandamus action under the Louisiana Public Records Law seeking the “initial police report” and related on-scene documents from NOPD, the Orleans Parish DA (ODA), and the Criminal District Court Clerk.
- The ODA produced multiple police reports; Lewis maintained the initial on-scene report (showing which officer(s) interviewed witnesses at 8:14 p.m.) was withheld.
- The trial court held status conferences, directed the ODA to produce reports (which it did), denied an evidentiary hearing, and ultimately dismissed the mandamus as moot, finding the custodians had provided the records available.
- Lewis appealed the dismissal; the Fourth Circuit affirmed, concluding Lewis failed to meet several statutory prerequisites for mandamus under La. R.S. 44:35.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lewis made a valid public-records request | Lewis contends prior criminal-case discovery and his filings put custodians on notice and constituted requests for the initial report | ODA and others: no written/electronic request to the custodian in the record; criminal motions are not public-records requests | Held: Lewis did not show a proper public-records request to a custodian, so mandamus prerequisites not met |
| Whether the requested “initial report” exists in the form Lewis seeks | Lewis asserts additional initial/on-scene reports (witness statements) exist that were not produced | Defendants produced the initial report(s) as defined by statute; on-scene witness statements need not be part of an "initial report" and some handwritten notes may be exempt | Held: Records produced satisfied statutory definition of initial report; defendants need not create or identify non-existent records |
| Whether custodians failed to respond entitling Lewis to mandamus | Lewis says custodians refused to comply and misled the court | Defendants deny failure to respond and contend they provided available records; ODA was not the custodian of NOPD records | Held: No demonstrated failure to respond; dismissal without contradictory hearing appropriate because mandamus requisites were not satisfied |
| Whether an evidentiary/contradictory hearing was required | Lewis requested an evidentiary hearing to compel production | Defendants argued hearing unnecessary where statutory requirements (written request, existence of records, failure to respond) were not established | Held: No contradictory hearing required; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying hearing and dismissing as moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Hatcher v. Rouse, 211 So.3d 431 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2017) (mandamus under Public Records Law and standard for public-records enforcement)
- Wells v. Criminal Dist. Court of Orleans Parish, 198 So.3d 283 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2016) (criminal motions do not substitute for statutory public-records requests)
- Cormier v. Public Records Request of Di Guilio, 553 So.2d 806 (La. 1989) (initial police reports are public records)
- Nungesser v. Brown, 667 So.2d 1036 (La. 1996) (custodian not required to produce documents in a form that does not exist)
- Title Research Corp. v. Rausch, 450 So.2d 933 (La. 1984) (access to public records liberally construed)
- A.M.E. Disaster Recovery Servs., Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 72 So.3d 454 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2011) (mandamus is extraordinary remedy; limitations where discretion involved)