×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Citizen Who Triggered Investigation Against Baltimore Police Refused Access To Report's Findings
Maryland citizen Kevin Briscoe appealed a 1993 court ruling denying the disclosure of investigative records initiated by his complaint against Baltimore police. The court affirmed nondisclosure because Briscoe was not the subject of the investigation.
Briscoe and others accused two policemen of excessive force, discourtesy, and misconduct when they entered the political headquarters of a pro firearms committee. The action was filed after the refusal to produce the report at the conclusion of the investigation under the Maryland Public Information Act (Act). The Baltimore Mayor and City Council cross motioned to dismiss, claiming they were not custodians of the report, Briscoe was not a "person of interest" and lacked standing, the action was barred by res judicata, and that Briscoe's attorney received a copy of the report as a result of another case. The City's motion to dismiss was granted without a hearing.
On appeal, the Second Division held that although a hearing was properly requested and thus the court erred, no practical purpose would be served by remanding for a hearing. The court further held that since Briscoe was not entitled to the report under the Act, no further grounds needed to be heard and affirmed dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See: Briscoe v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 100 Md. App. 124, 640 A.D.2d 226 (1994).
Briscoe and others accused two policemen of excessive force, discourtesy, and misconduct when they entered the political headquarters of a pro firearms committee. The action was filed after the refusal to produce the report at the conclusion of the investigation under the Maryland Public Information Act (Act). The Baltimore Mayor and City Council cross motioned to dismiss, claiming they were not custodians of the report, Briscoe was not a "person of interest" and lacked standing, the action was barred by res judicata, and that Briscoe's attorney received a copy of the report as a result of another case. The City's motion to dismiss was granted without a hearing.
On appeal, the Second Division held that although a hearing was properly requested and thus the court erred, no practical purpose would be served by remanding for a hearing. The court further held that since Briscoe was not entitled to the report under the Act, no further grounds needed to be heard and affirmed dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See: Briscoe v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 100 Md. App. 124, 640 A.D.2d 226 (1994).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Briscoe v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
| Year | 1994 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 100 Md. App. 124, 640 A.D.2d 226 (1994) |
| Level | State Court of Appeals |
| Injunction Status | N/A |