State Ex Rel. Miller v. Ohio State Highway Patrol
136 Ohio St. 3d 350
| Ohio | 2013Background
- Miller sought public records from the Ohio State Highway Patrol (and an employee) concerning Trooper Westhoven’s stop/arrest of Ashley Ruberg in July 2011.
- Patrol produced some records but withheld video/audio from the cruiser and impaired-driver reports related to the Ruberg incident.
- Patrol asserted the withheld records were investigatory work product under R.C. 149.43(A)(1)(h) and (A)(2).
- Twelfth District dismissed Miller’s mandamus for procedural defects but, on review, considered the evidence and found Miller failed to prove denial of records by clear and convincing evidence.
- Court concluded the Patrol must prove the withheld records fall within the “confidential law enforcement investigatory record” exception and remanded to determine this.
- The case centers on whether the records are within the statutory exception and whether Miller’s evidence supports mandamus relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miller proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that the Patrol denied records | Miller’s March 20, 2012 letter shows denial of records | Patrol maintained records were not disclosed due to investigatory work product | Remanded to assess applicability of the exception |
| Whether the withheld records fall within the confidential law enforcement investigatory record exception | Records should be public records | Records fall within investigatory work product under the exception | Remanded for the Twelfth District to decide if records meet the exception |
| What standard governs mandamus relief in public records cases | Relator entitled to relief if records denied | Relator must show evidence meets strict standard | Mandamus requires clear and convincing evidence (ongoing review on remand) |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Jones-Kelley, 118 Ohio St.3d 81 (2008) (custodian must prove records squarely fit an exemption)
- State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publ’g Co. v. Maurer, 91 Ohio St.3d 54 (2001) (defines confidential investigatory records and exemptions)
- State ex rel. Musial v. N. Olmsted, 106 Ohio St.3d 459 (2005) (two-part test for confidential records under 149.43(A)(2))
- State ex rel. Doner v. Zody, 130 Ohio St.3d 446 (2011) (mandamus standard: clear and convincing evidence)
- State ex rel. Rocker v. Guernsey Cty. Sheriff’s Office, 126 Ohio St.3d 224 (2010) (liberal access but require entitlement by clear and convincing evidence)
- State ex rel. Physicians Comm. for Responsible Medicine v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 108 Ohio St.3d 288 (2006) (mandamus to compel public-records compliance)