Sturgis v. Department of Corrections
2014 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 368
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2014Background
- Sturgis, an inmate at SCI-Dallas, requested his judgment of sentence from DOC under RTKL.
- DOC denied the request, claiming the record does not exist and need not be created under RTKL § 67.705.
- OOR accepted an attestation from SCI-Dallas stating the record did not exist in DOC’s possession.
- OOR affirmed DOC’s non-existence finding after evaluating the attestation.
- Sturgis appealed, arguing DOC failed to prove non-existence and that § 1101(c) requires notifying a third party.
- Court affirmed the OOR’s decision, holding DOC did not have to locate or create a record not in its possession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DOC met the burden to prove non-existence of the record | Sturgis (Sturgis) argues DOC failed to prove non-existence. | Sturgis contends DOC should have located or created the record; OOR erred. | Affirmed; DOC adequately proved non-existence. |
| Whether § 1101(c) requires DOC to notify third parties to obtain the record | Sturgis relies on § 1101(c) to require third-party disclosure involvement. | DOC is not required to notify third parties to obtain records not in its possession. | Not required; no duty to notify third parties when record not possessed. |
| Whether § 9764(a)(8) mandates possession of the sentencing order by DOC | DOC should have the order under § 9764(a)(8). | DOC cannot produce a record it does not possess. | Inapplicable; DOC cannot be compelled to possess a record it does not have. |
Key Cases Cited
- Moore v. Office of Open Records, 992 A.2d 907 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (affidavits of non-existence suffice to deny RTKL requests)
- Allegheny County Dept. of Administrative Services v. A Second Chance, Inc., 13 A.3d 1025 (Pa.Cmwlth.2011) (intervention and third-party notification not mandatory under §1101)