state of new mexico second judicial district · pdf filestate of new mexico second judicial...

STATE OF NEW MEXICO SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO KRQE NEWS 13, Plaintiff, v. Case No. CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE Defendant.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF UNDER THE NEW MEXICO INSPECTION OF PUBLIC RECORDS ACT

Plaintiff KRQE News 13, by and through its counsel of record, Esquivel Law Firm, LLC

(Martin R. Esquivel) hereby state:

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. Plaintiff KRQE News 13, brings this action pursuant to the New Mexico Inspection of

Public Records Act, NMSA 1978, Section 14-2-1 et seq. Plaintiff states that there is a pattern and

practice in the City of Albuquerque Police Department to disregard the New Mexico Inspection of

Public Records Act and the obfuscate attempts to obtain public records.

2. Numerous employees of KRQE News 13 have made IPRA requests to the city of

Albuquerque since November of 2013.

3. The City of Albuquerque Police Department has continuously violated the Act since that

time.

4. The express purpose of the Act is set forth at § 14-2-5 as follows: “Recognizing that a

representative government is dependent upon an informed electorate, the intent of the legislature

in enacting the Inspection of Public Records Act is to ensure, and it is declared to be the public

policy of this state, that all persons are entitled to the greatest possible information regarding the

affairs of government and the official acts of public officers and employees. It is the further intent

of the legislature, and it is declared to be the public policy of this state, that to provide persons

with such information is an essential function of a representative government and an integral part

of the routine duties of public officers and employees.”

PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. Plaintiff KRQE News 13 is a television station operated in Albuquerque, New Mexico and

owned by LIN Media.

6. Defendant City of Albuquerque is a municipality created and operating under the laws of

the State of New Mexico and oversees the Albuquerque Police Department.

7. The matters giving rise to this complaint occurred in Bernalillo County, New Mexico.

8. Jurisdiction and venue are proper pursuant to the Inspection of Public Records Act, NMSA

1978, Section 14-2-1 to -12 (“IPRA”) and the venue statute, NMSA 1978, Section 38-3-1 (1988).

9. There exists an actual controversy between the parties regarding the Defendants’ duties

under the IPRA. Accordingly, an action for declaratory relief is authorized under NMSA 1978,

Sections 44-6-2 and 44-6-4.

FACTS

10. Plaintiff KRQE News 13 employs reporters and producers to report on news events

throughout New Mexico, including but not limited to the metropolitan Albuquerque area.

11. In the course and scope of their work with KRQE News 13, reporters Kim Holland, Matt

Grubs and Tina Jensen, News Producer Jeff Proctor, and Assignment Editor Daniel Trujillo have

made requests for public records on behalf of KRQE News 13 from the City of Albuquerque Police

Department personal to IPRA.

12. On April 10, 2014, following a comprehensive investigation, the United States Justice

-2-

Department announced its findings that the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) engaged in a

pattern or practice of excessive force that violates the Constitution and federal law.

13. Over the course of the last year, the City of Albuquerque has engaged in a pattern and

practice of refusing to respond to IPRA requests from KRQE News 13 failed to respond within the

appropriate deadlines, incompletely responded to certain requests and asserted privileges and

extensions to IPRA which cannot be substantiated.

14. In addition, the City of Albuquerque has claimed it has responded to IPRA requests but

knowingly withheld certain documents within its possession in violation of the Act.

Kim Holland Request

15. On Thursday, September 19, 2013, Kim Holland, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a

formal IPRA written request via email to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s

Public Records Custodian. Holland requested all documents, reports, lapel video and 911 dispatch

audio/calls for a call on 8/17/13 at 6809 Astair NW at 17:50 hrs.

16. On Friday, September 20, 2013, Chavez sent Holland a formal response acknowledging

the receipt of the IPRA request. He said that he would continue to review the records and would

contact Holland prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the request.

17. On Wednesday, October 2, 2014, David Torres, on behalf of the Office of the APD

Records Custodian, sent Holland a request for an extension of fifteen (15) days to complete the

September 19, 2014 IPRA request.

18. On Friday, October 18, 2014, Torres requested an additional fifteen (15) days to complete

the September 19, 2014 IPRA request.

-3-

19. On the same day, October 18, 2014, Holland sent Chavez an email asking about the delayed

request. She asked why the request had been delayed and wanted to know when she would know

about it.

20. On Monday, October 21, 2013, Chavez sent Holland an email stating that the request for

video would not be realized pursuant to IPRA Statute NMSA 14-2-1(b) 4 (IPRA – Law

Enforcement Exception). He said that the investigation has not yet been completed. Chavez

ignored Holland’s request for other information contained in her September 19, 2013 request.

21. On October 23, 2013 APD reasserted its law enforcement exception to Holland’s previous

requests.

22. On November 12, 2013 Holland sent a letter to Acting Police Chief William Roseman

asking when the documents would be released.

23. Upon information and belief this matter is no longer in investigation.

24. The previously asserted law enforcement exception was improperly asserted by the City of

Albuquerque and needs to be assessed by the court in camera. The court should also determine if

other information should have been timely produced in regards to Holland’s September 19, 2013

request.

25. There has been no more correspondence between Holland and any representative of the

City of Albuquerque or the Albuquerque Police Department regarding this IPRA request.

Jeff Proctor Request

26. On Monday, April 7, 2014, Jeff Proctor, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal IPRA

written request via email to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s Public

Records Custodian. Proctor requested access to any and all subpoenas received by the City of

-4-

Albuquerque and its employees related to the federal investigation of the March 16, 2014 incident

involving James Boyd.

27. On the same day, Chavez sent Proctor a formal response acknowledging the receipt of the

IPRA request. He said that he would continue to review the records and would contact Proctor

prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the request.

28. There has been no other formal communication about this IPRA Request. The fifteen day

deadline passed on April 22, 2014.

29. APD never responded to Mr. Proctor in regard to this request.

30. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Jeff Proctor, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal

IPRA written request via email to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s Public

Records Custodian. Proctor requested access to all emails sent to and from APD Communications

Director Janet Blair from May 16 to May 21, 2014.

31. Chavez sent Proctor a formal response acknowledging the receipt of the IPRA request the

same day. He said that he would continue to review the records and would contact Proctor prior to

the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the request.

32. On June 5, 2014, Chavez sent Proctor an email. He said that the documents had been

identified but were under review for “privileged and exempt contents”. He said he needed (15)

additional days “given the volume and nature of the records request”.

33. Proctor sent a response to Chavez that same day. He wanted to know what type of

information could be redacted. He also said that he tailored the request for a 5 day period to not

get “stuck in the ‘volume and nature’ trap”. He said that he did not think that there was a sufficient

explanation for the request of an extension. This was the 15th day since the initial request.

-5-

34. On Monday, June 9, 2014, Chavez sent Proctor a response. He said that the responsive

documents were at the Office of the City Clerk and that some documents were withheld under

the Attorney-Client Privilege rule without any specificity other than that broad and general

assertion.

35. Some documents responsive to Mr. Proctor’s request were produced on or about June 11,

2014. However, the documents withheld on the basis of Attorney-Client Privilege were not

identified.

36. Upon information and belief, the asserted attorney-client privileges are unsubstantiated

and need to be reviewed by the court in camera to determine if the asserted privileges are

applicable.

37. On June 5, 2014, Jeff Proctor sent an Inspection of Public Records Request for Reynaldo

Chavez requesting lapel/body camera videos from APD Officer Jeremy Dear for 12/19/11,

4/17/12, 6/9/12, 7/6/12, 8/5/12, 9/9/12, 9/16/12, 3/17/13, 3/27/13, 4/7/13, 4/22/13, 9/24/13 and

11/4/13.

38. Proctor contacted Mr. Chavez on July 9, 2014 to check on the status of the request after it

was overdue. Mr. Chavez said he would give Proctor an update and would provide some status

late on July 10, 2014.

39. On July 14, 2014, Proctor again reminded Chavez about the request. On July 14, 2014,

Chavez said the request had been sent to evidence and it was awaiting status on the request.

40. Since July 14, 2014, the City of Albuquerque has not responded to Proctor’s request for

Officer Dear’s lapel cam videos.

41. On Tuesday, June 24, 2014, Jeff Proctor, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal


-6-

Records Custodian. Proctor requested access to any and all files compiled or maintained by the

APD Criminal Intelligence Unit between “January 1, 2012 and the present date” related to police

protest/accountability groups, associated individuals and the activities of those individuals and/or

groups. He also requested access to any and all files compiled or maintained by the APD Criminal

Intelligence Unit between “January 1, 2012 and the present date” related to any journalist. He

requested access to any and all file numbers that correspond to the requested files.




43. On October 7, 2014 Chavez responded that there were no documents responsive to

Proctor’s request. The response was well beyond the City of Albuquerque’s 15-day deadline to

respond to Proctor’s request.

44. Additionally, on June 24, 2014, Mr. Proctor made a formal IPRA written request via email

to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s Public Records Custodian. Proctor

requested access to any and all video or still images captured by APD Sgt. Jason Peck or other

members of the Special Investigations Division at the demonstration on Saturday June 21, 2014.

He also requested access to any and all reports – or similarly titled documents – compiled by the

SID based in its presence at the demonstration. He also requested any and all correspondence –

emails, memos, text messages, etc. – between members of the SID and Rob Perry, Bob Huntsman,

Gorden Eden, Anthony Montano and Tim Gonterman regarding the demonstration.




-7-

46. Chavez emailed Proctor on July 2, 2014 requesting reasonable particularity in regards to

the correspondence between members of the SID and Rob Perry, Bob Huntsman, Gorden Eden,

Anthony Montano and Tim Gonterman regarding the demonstration. He asked for a reasonable

date range of the correspondence and the names of the SID personnel who should have been

included in the search.

47. Proctor emailed Chavez a response on July 7, 2014. He specified the date range of June 19

to June 23, 2014. He asked for the SID personnel: Jason Peck, Sean Wallace, Danny Porter and

Les Brown. He said he would like email correspondence from any member of the Criminal

Intelligence Unit but he did not have a comprehensive list of which officers are assigned to that

unit. He asks if it is possible, for Chavez to gather emails for all members of that unit without

further delaying release of the requested public records, if not for him to just stick with the names

provided.

48. Proctor emailed Chavez the next day on July 8, 2014. He asked Chavez if he received his

email from the day before regarding the IPRA request.

49. On July 10, 2014, one video was provided to Mr. Proctor. However, there were no reports,

still photographs, other videos or correspondence provided as requested to Mr. Proctor. Upon

information and belief, other information exists and has not been provided.

50. On October 7, 2014, after business hours and way beyond the deadline to respond to the

IPRA request, Chavez provided redacted information to Proctor. The records that Chavez

provided were not responsive and there was no explanation provided for what has been withheld.

51. On June 30, 2014, Mr. Proctor made a written inspection of public records request to the

City Clerk requesting all correspondence from the U.S. Department of Justice to Mayor Richard

Berry.

-8-

52. On July 7, 2014, Angela Aragon responded to the request stating her office would need

additional time to conduct research and locate the files should they exist. This was beyond the 3

day response time provided by the Inspection of Public Records Act.

53. On July 16, 2014, Ms. Aragon sent Mr. Proctor a letter requesting greater “reasonable

particularity” in order to search the necessary emails.

54. On July 18, 2014, Mr. Proctor responded to Ms. Aragon’s request and questioned the

assertion that the request was “broad and burdensome” as asserted in Ms. Aragon’s assertion in

her July 16, 2014 email. Mr. Proctor also provided the reasonable particularity which had also

been requested by Ms. Aragon.

55. There has been no further response to Mr. Proctor’s request. 71 days have passed since his

original request and 54 days have passed on his email to Ms. Aragon’s request for “reasonable

particularity.”

56. On August 14, 2014, Mr. Proctor made a public records request to Reynaldo Chavez for

information maintained, compiled or kept on all officer involved shootings from 1994 to the

present.

57. On August 15, 2014, Mr. Chavez acknowledged Mr. Proctor’s request and stated his

request would be reviewed and he would be contacted in 15 days from receipt of Mr. Proctor’s

August 14, 2014 request.

58. No further response was provided to Mr. Proctor and until an email on Saturday beyond

the responsive deadline on October 8, 2014. The documentation provided was incomplete.46 days

have passed since his original request.

-9-

59. Mr. Proctor has still not been provided the information requested April 7, 2014, June 5,

2014, or June 30, 2014.

Matt Grubs Request

60. On Wednesday, April 23, 2014, Matt Grubs, on behalf of KRQE News 13, sent Breanna

Anderson and Erin Thompson, both spokeswomen for Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry an email

asking a few questions. He asked when Rob Perry signed off on Ray Schultz’s employment with

Taser and if there was any documentation of that. He also asked how the city came to select

Greenwood & Streicher for consultation/negotiation services - if the city consulted or contacted

anyone else in the search for those services. He also asked if he could set up a meeting to talk with

the consultants.

61. Thompson responded to both Grubs and Anderson on the same day. She said that Chief

Schultz did not notify the CAO of his employment with Taser and that the Mayor learned of it via

the media. She said she would look into the other questions.

62. On Tuesday, May 1, 2014 Grubs followed up with Thompson and asked if she had any

information on his previous questions. Thompson did not respond.

63. On Tuesday, May 6, 2014, Angela Aragon, the Office Manager, Records Custodian,

Assistant to the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Operations Officer for Mayor

Berry sent an attachment to Grubs. The attachment was a formal letter on the Mayor’s Office

letterhead dated May 5, 2014. The letter acknowledged the April 23, 2014 IPRA request referring

to the questions in Grubs’ initial email. Aragon asked for 15 days to notify Grubs about the

documentation.

-10-

64. On May 19, 2014, a former letter on the Mayor’s office letterhead was sent to Mr. Grubs.

The letter stated that there are no documents in regard to Rob Perry signing off on Ray Schultz’s

employment with Taser. It also says that Erin Thompson responded on the other two matters.

65. There has been no other formal communication about this IPRA request.

66. The Mayor’s Office filed an IPRA on behalf of KRQE News 13 without its permission,

entitled “Matt Grubs 3 day letter.” Moreover, the first letter that was attached was sent 12 days

after Grubs sent the initial request for information, 9 days after the required response within 3

days. It took 26 days to complete the request, 11 days after the required 15 days were over.

Tina Jensen Request

67. On April 24, 2014, Tina Jensen, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal IPRA written

request via email to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s Public Records

Custodian. Jensen requested a copy of the Annual Analysis of Uses of Force for 2013.

68. Previous City of Albuquerque Police Department Uses of Force for the years of 2011 and

2012 were conducted by February 1, 2012 and February 12, 2014.

69. On Friday, April 25, 2014, Chavez sent Jensen a formal response acknowledging the IPRA

request. He said that he would continue to review the records and would contact Jensen prior to


70. On Wednesday, May 7, 2014, David Torres sent an email saying, “This email will

acknowledge our request for an extension in time (additional 15 days) to complete your IPRA

Request dated April 24th, 2014. The revised date of completions on or before May 22nd, 2014.”

71. On Wednesday, May 7, 2014, David Torres sent a “Recall” message about the prior email

(item 26). The email stated, “Torres, David L. would like to recall the message, ‘IPRA / Media /

KRQE / Jensen / Annual Analysis of Uses of Force for 2013.’”

-11-

72. On Friday, May 9, 2014, Jensen sent Torres and Chavez a follow-up asking for the reason

for the extension.

73. On Friday, May 9, 2014, Chavez said he would check with his staff on the status.

74. On Friday, May 9, 2014, Chavez sent another email saying he had “been informed the

reason for the extension is that the report is not yet available.”

75. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Jensen sent a follow-up asking for the status of the request.

76. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Chavez sent a response saying the status was “the same as

the 9th Ma’am – the report is not yet available.”

77. On Tuesday, June 3, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up email regarding the document.

She said that in prior years, the reports were generally completed within the first quarter of the

calendar year.

78. On Wednesday, June 4, 2014, Chavez sent a response saying “the responsive unit is still

compiling this information.” He said they hoped to have it soon.

79. On Friday, June 27, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up email about the request for the

documents.

80. On Monday, July 7, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez another follow-up email about the request

for the documents.

81. On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez another follow-up regarding the

documents.

82. On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Chavez sent a response saying that the Uses of Force

documentation was “pending approval”.

-12-

83. On Friday, July 11, 2014 at 2:58 pm, Jensen responded to Chavez and asked why the

request was pending review. She said that she had received reports from prior years without a

problem.

84. On Monday, July 14, 2014, Jensen responded to Chavez and asked for a response. On

Wednesday, July 16, 2014, Jensen again asked for a response.

85. On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 Chavez responded to Jensen and said that the information

was not yet available.

86. On Monday, July 21, 2014, Jensen sent an inquiry about the documents to Janet Blair.

87. On Tuesday, July 22, 2014, Blair sent a response saying she would look into it.

88. On Tuesday, July 22, 2014, Blair sent another email saying, “We compile

annually…Looking for it now.”

89. On Tuesday, July 22, 2014, Jensen sent a response, thanking her.

90. On Tuesday, July 22, 2014, Blair sent a response saying, “Got it and needs one more

review and Chief to approve. Tomorrow or maybe Thursday.”

91. On Wednesday, July 23, 2014, Jensen sent another follow-up.

92. On Wednesday, July 23, 2014, Blair responded saying, “Given our current situation, I’m

pretty sure it will be later rather than sooner.”

93. On Thursday, August 5, 2014, Jensen sent another follow-up.

94. On Wednesday, August 6, 2014, Blair said she would check again.

95. On Thursday, August 7, 2014, Jensen sent another follow-up.

96. On Monday, August 25, 2014, Jensen sent another follow-up.

97. On Monday, August 25, 2014, Blair said she would check again.

98. On Monday, August 25, 2014, Jensen asked for the status of the documents.

-13-

99. On Monday, August 25, 2014, Blair sent a response saying it might be available

“Thursday or maybe Friday” and that it was “being finalized.”

100. On August 25, 2014 it had been 124 days since the first written request. There still has

been no response to the request.

101. On Thursday, April 24, 2014, Tina Jensen, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal


Records Custodian. Jensen requested access to copies of documents that showed the APD gun

inventory as of April 21, 2014, including documents that have the make, model, and serial numbers

of APD guns assigned to officers.

102. On Friday, April 25, 2014, Chavez sent Jensen a formal response acknowledging the

receipt of the IPRA request. He said that he would continue to review the records and would

contact Jensen prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the request.

103. On Wednesday, May 7, 2014, David Torres, on behalf of the Office of the APD Records

Custodian, sent Jensen a request for an extension of fifteen (15) days to complete the May 7, 2014

IPRA request. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up about the request.

104. On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up about the request for

documents.

105. On Thursday, May 22, 2014 Chavez sent Jensen a response about the IPRA request. He

said that the request was denied pursuant to the exemptions from Sections 14-2-1(4), (7). And (8),

NMSA 1978.

106. Jensen responded to Chavez that day asking how those were appropriate exemptions for

a list of the APD gun inventory

-14-

107. More than a week later on Friday, May 30, 2014, Chavez responded to Jensen. He said

that they are asserting IPRA exception (4) for “For law enforcement records that reveal

confidential sources, methods, information or individuals accused but not charged with a crime.

Law enforcement records include evidence in any form received or compiled in connection with a

criminal investigation or prosecution by law enforcement or prosecuting agency, including

inactive matters or closed investigations to the extent that they contain the information listed in

this paragraph.”

108. Chavez said that they were asserting exception (7) for “Tactical response plans or

procedures prepared for or by the state or a political subdivision of the state, the publication of

which would reveal specific vulnerabilities, risk assessments or tactical emergency security

procedures that could be used to facilitate the planning or execution of a terrorist attack.”

109. He said that they were asserting exception (8) for reasons “as otherwise provided”.

110. There was no formal correspondence between KRQE New 13 and the City of

Albuquerque regarding this IPRA request after this.

111. Upon information and belief, the asserted privileges by the City of Albuquerque are

unsubstantiated and should be reviewed in camera to determine whether the assertions are proper.

112. On Thursday, May 29, 2014, Tina Jensen, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal


Records Custodian. Jensen requested access to all citizen complaints made against Officer Daniel

Carr from 2011-present.

113. Chavez sent Jensen a formal response acknowledging the receipt of the IPRA request the

next day, on Friday, May 29, 2014. He said that he would continue to review the records and would

contact Jensen prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the request.

-15-

114. On Friday, June, 13, 2014 Chavez sent Jensen an email saying that she could pick up the

requested items at the Security Station and it would cost $33.50. On Friday, June 13, 2014, Jensen

sent a thank you to acknowledge the email.

115. On Monday June 30, 2014 Jensen responded to Chavez and said that upon review of the

documents, the City had not released all responsive documents. She requested a copy of all citizen

complaints made against Daniel Carr and additional responsive documents, including target

letter(s) to Daniel Carr created this year. She asked for it to be done as soon as possible since the

request was due on June 13, 2014.

116. On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at 2:01 p.m. Jensen sent Chavez another email asking for

the documents, noting APD had not turned over all citizen complaints against Officer Carr as

requested.

117. That day Chavez responded to Jensen saying that all available documents were turned

over but they would conduct a supplemental search for additional documents. That same day,

Jensen sent Chavez a separate IPRA request for a jpeg image of APD Officer Daniel Carr (included

in my attachment). It was never acknowledged nor fulfilled.

118. On Monday, July 7, 2014 Jensen responded to Chavez and asked about the documents.

119. On Wednesday, July 9, 2014 Jensen sent Chavez another follow-up email about the

documents.

120. On Thursday, July 10, 2014 at 1:26 pm Chavez sent a response to the July 7, 2014

request for information on the four pending requests. He said that the Carr information was

available with (1) invoice attached.

121. On Friday, July 11, 2014, Jensen responded to Chavez and said that someone would

pick up the Carr information later.

-16-

122. On Monday, July 14, 2014 Jensen responded to Chavez and saying that she sent

someone the Friday before to pick up the Carr documentation and was told it was unavailable that

day. She said she was planning on sending someone that day and wanted to make sure the requests

would be ready.

123. Upon information and belief, not all citizen complaints relating to officer Carr were

produced by the City of Albuquerque.

124. On Tuesday June 4, 2014, Tina Jensen, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal


Records Custodian. Jensen requested for all security/surveillance video from the Mayor’s suite,

including the reception area, from 2 pm – 5 pm on June 2, 2014.

125. On June 25, 2014, Chavez sent Jensen an acknowledgement letter for the June 4, 2014

request.

126. On June 27, 2014 Jensen sent Reynaldo Chavez notifying the June 4, 2014 request is

late.

127. On July 9, 2014 Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up email about the documents, noting that

she still heard nothing.

128. The information was given to KRQE News 13 42 days after the initial request without

an explanation.

129. On June 3, 2014, Tina Jensen, on behalf of KRQE News 13, made a formal IPRA written

request via email to Reynaldo Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department’s Public Records

Custodian. Jensen requested a copy of the final case write-up of the SWAT situation that took

place near Oakland and San Pedro on Friday, March 21, 2014.

-17-

130. On July 7, 2014 Tina Jensen sent Reynaldo Chavez requesting information on the status

of this request.

131. On July 9, 2014 Jensen sent Chavez a follow-up email about the documents.

132. On July 10, 2014 Chavez sent a response to the July 7 email. He copied the email that

David Torres sent to Jensen on Tuesday, May 6, 2014. It said that the report attached was the entire

report for the incident as of that date.

133. On July 11, 2014, Jensen responded to Chavez and asked why the final case write-up of

the March SWAT situation was “not available”. She said that APD informed her in May that they

were wrapping it up and it would be done soon.

134. On July 14, 2014 at Jensen responded to Chavez and asked for a response.

135. On July 16, 2014 Chavez responded to Jensen and said that the information was not yet

available.

136. Upon information and belief, the report does exist and is not being timely produced.

137. On August 27, 2014, Tina Jensen sent an Inspection of Public Records Request asking

for all crime scene photos for Case No. 140025167. There was no three day acknowledgement to

this request by the City of Albuquerque.

138. On September 4, 2014, Jensen asked Chavez for an acknowledgement of the IPRA

request made on August 27, 2014.

139. On September 5, 2014, Chavez sent acknowledgement saying, “This email will

acknowledge receipt of your public records request dated September 4, 2014.”

140. On September 5, 2014, Jenson wrote to Chavez asking for an acknowledgement with

the correct date for the request was August 27, 2014 not September 4, 2014. Chavez sent a

corrected version of the letter.

-18-

141. On September 17, 2014, Jensen asked if the photos were ready, noting it had been 22

days since the request was made.

142. On September 23, 2014, Jensen sent an email with this request after our phone

conversation. Chavez wrote back stating he would get Jensen the information the next morning

after they did some “minor redactions to prevent some personal identifiers.”

143. On September 24, 2014, Jensen received a cd labeled with the correct case number- but

it was completely blank. Jensen emailed Chavez about the blank cd.

144. On September 24, 2014, Chavez wrote back apologizing and saying he would get some

answers. On Thursday September 25, 2014 around 9:30 a.m., Chavez called and asked for the

blank cd back. He said he would get me the correct one.

145. On September 26, 2014, KRQE News 13 picked up the new cd. It only contained the

property photos taken from what OMI returned. It contained no crime scene photos. Jensen wrote

them an email asking them to provide the correct photos.

146. On September 30, 2014, Chavez sent an email saying a “supplemental search was

conducted by APD, the search resulted in no additional responsive public records. We have

previously provided all of the public records.”

147. On September 30, 2014, Jensen wrote back, saying “Just to be clear, APD is claiming

there are no crime scene photos from this case?”

148. On October 6, 2014 the City of Albuquerque finally responded to Jensen’s request for

crime scene photos made on August 27, 2014. Torres errantly responded to Jensen that she had

made the request on September 24, 2014.

149. On October 7, 2014 Jensen finally obtained the crime scene photos.

-19-

150. 39 days passed since the initial request was made by Jensen and only after insisting that

such photographs had to be in existence were they ultimately produced.

Daniel Trujillo Request

151. On March 17, 2014, Daniel Trujillo requested certain information, including dash

cam footage, related to the officer involved shooting on March 16, 2014.

152. On March 17, 2014, Reynaldo Chavez responded to Mr. Trujillo’s request stating

that it would be reviewed and he would be contacted within fifteen (15) days of his request.

153. On April 1, 2014, Deputy City Attorney Kathryn Levy stated the records were

exempt pursuant to 14-2-1(A)(4) and (8).

154. Levy cited an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigations as the reason

why documents would not be produced. However, on March 31, 2014 correspondence from the

FBI did not advise the City of Albuquerque to deny IPRA requests concerning the shooting of

James Boyd.

155. The City of Albuquerque did not ever specifically respond to Trujillo’s March 17,

2014 IPRA request.

156. On March 21, 2014 the City of Albuquerque released a clip of helmet camera video

from Officer Dominique Perez that showed the moments leading up to the fatal shooting of James

Boyd. The City of Albuquerque also released select clips from other officers from the start of

the encounter with Boyd until it escalated until the final conclusion.

157. During the press conference on March 21, 2014 at Police Headquarters,

Albuquerque Police Chief Gorden Eden stated the shooting was justified.

-20-

158. From March 21, 2014 until June 11, 2014, the City of Albuquerque refused to

provide any information responsive to Trujillo’s request and insisted that all requests be

conducted through the federal Freedom of Information Act.

159. The City of Albuquerque selectively provided three DVDs of information on or about

June 11, 2014 that provided lapel cam videos from numerous officers who had been on scene

during the James Boyd shooting. The release of information did not include video from officer

Keith Sandy because, according to the City of Albuquerque, it did not exist.

160. In addition, the release of information the release did not include dash cam footage

from State Police Sergeant Chris Ware which was covered in Mr. Trujillo’s March 17, 2014 written

IPRA request to the City of Albuquerque.

161. Upon information and belief, the City of Albuquerque had the dash cam footage

from Sergeant Ware and failed to produce the information responsive to Trujillo’s request.

162. The dash cam footage was subsequently released to media outlets after it was

broadcast on another television station on September 28, 2014.

163. The information requested by Trujillo on March 17, 2014 was not timely released

as requested and was only produced after it was obtained by other sources.

164. Upon information and belief, the City of Albuquerque abused the exemption cited

in its April 1, 2014 letter to Trujillo for the sole purpose of controlling the release of information

for public relations purposes only.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF THE NEW MEXICO INSPECTION OF PUBLIC RECORDS

165. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates all allegations in the Complaint as if

fully set forth herein.

-21-

166. The City of Albuquerque violated the Inspection of Public Records Act by

refusing to respond to Kim Holland’s September 19, 2013 written request for public documents.

167. The City of Albuquerque actions violated the New Mexico Inspection of Public

Records Act.

COUNT II

168. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates all allegation in the Complaint as if fully set

forth herein.

169. The City of Albuquerque violated the Inspection of Public Records Act by refusing to

respond to Jeff Proctor’s April 7, 2014 written request for public documents. The City of

Albuquerque never responded to Proctor’s request.


Records.

COUNT III

171. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates all allegation in the Complaint as if fully

set forth herein.

172. The City of Albuquerque violated the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records

Act by refusing to respond to Jeff Proctor’s May 21, 2014 written request for emails to and from

Janet by improperly withholding claiming they were protected by the attorney-client privilege.

173. The City of Albuquerque actions violated the New Mexico Public Records

Inspection Act.

COUNT IV

174. Plaintiff hereby realleges and incorporates all allegation in the Complaint as if


-22-


Act by not timely responding to Jeff Proctor’s June 5, 2014 written request by not providing

lapel camera videos relating to APD Officer Jeremy Deer. The City of Albuquerque never

responded to Proctor’s request.


Records Act.

COUNT V




Act by not properly responding to Jeff Proctor’s June 24, 2014 written request on a timely basis.


Records Act.

COUNT VI




Act by not properly responding to Jeff Proctor’s June 24, 2014 written request for documentation

captured by APD sergeant Jason Peck, intelligence files and correspondence.


Records Act.

COUNT VII



-23-


Act by not properly responding to Jeff Proctor’s August 14, 2014 written request for a list of

officer involved shootings.


Records Act.

COUNT VIII




Act by not responding to Jeff Proctor’s June 30, 2014 written request providing the Department

of Justice correspondence. The City of Albuquerque never responded to Proctor’s request.


Records Act.

COUNT IX




Act by not responding to Tina Jensen’s April 24, 2014 written request for a copy of the Annual

Analysis of Uses of Force Act.


Records Act.

-24-

COUNT X




Act by not responding to Tina Jensen’s written request for access to all citizens complaints made

against Officer Daniel Carr from 2011-present.


Records Act.

COUNT XI




Act by not responding to Tina Jensen’s June 4, 2014 request for all security/surveillance video

from the Mayor’s suite, including the reception area, from 2 pm-5 pm on June 2, 2014.


Records Act.

COUNT XII




Records Act by not timely responding to Tina Jenson’s June 3, 2014 request for a final write up

of the SWAT situation which took place near Oakland NE and San Pedro NE on March 21.

2014.

-25-


Records Act.

COUNT XIII




Records Act by not responding to Matt Grubs’ April 23, 2014 which was turned into an IPRA

request by failing to respond in a timely manner.

203. The City of Albuquerque actions violated the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records

Act.

COUNT XIV




Act by not responding timely to Daniel Trujillo’s March 17, 2014 request for all dash cam

footage and failing to comprehensively provide all information requested. It also improperly

asserted it would not provide all information requested. It also improperly asserted it would not

provide information und the Law Enforcement exemption under IPRA which had no legal basis.


Records Act.

-26-

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

1. Defendant KRQE News 13 is entitled to an award of damages when the failure to

provide a timely explanation of the denial is term determined to be unreasonable.

NMSA 1978 14 – 2–11C. The award of damages for failure to provide a timely

explanation of denial shall not exceed $100 per day.

2. Based on the 14 counts included in this Complaint, plaintiff has incurred damages,

costs, expenses and is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys fees.

3. The Inspection of Public Records Act allows the district court to enter a writ of

mandamus or order of injunction or other appropriate remedy to enforce the provisions

of the act. Defendant seeks an order requiring Defendant to produce the requested

records stated in Counts 1-14.

4. Plaintiff also requested award of damages, costs and reasonable attorneys fees based

on the city of Albuquerque's denials and its efforts to enforce the provisions of the

Inspection the Public Records Act.

Respectfully submitted, ESQUIVEL LAW FIRM, LLC /s/ Martin R. Esquivel Martin R. Esquivel 111 Lomas Blvd. NW, Ste. 203 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 T: (505) 933-6880 [email protected]

-27-

mailto:[email protected]

state of new mexico second judicial district · pdf filestate of new mexico second judicial...

Documents