Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1995/access.to.court.records.html
Content
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.
access to court records
```
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 14:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Beth Givens
---
September 8, 1995
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING PRIVACY OF AND ACCESS TO CALIFORNIA COURT RECORDS
From: Beth Givens Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Univ. of San Diego voice: 619-260-4160 fax: 619-298-5681 e-mail: bgivens@acusd.edu
The Judicial Council of California's Subcommittee on Privacy and Access, of which I am a member, is holding two important hearings in California during September and October. These hearings allow people to express their concerns and opinions on the development of computerized court records vis-a-vis privacy and access.
The hearings are open to all -- Californians as well as those from other states who wish to be heard on these issues. (Non- Californians might include representatives of privacy advocacy groups, civil libertarians, trade associations, and industry).
If you are not able to attend the hearings, you may provide written testimony, as explained in the notice below. *DEADLINE is October 18th.*
Why are these hearings important? And why is it important for privacy advocates to express their opinions on the issue of computerization and electronic dissemination of court records?
There is little to argue about regarding the value to our democratic society of public access to government records. Public records provide notice to all members of society of the official actions taken by government, giving the citizens the opportunity to see what their government is doing. Public records also provide notice of the "official" status of individuals and property. In short, public records promote government accountability.
But the tradition of public access to court records may need to be re-examined vis-a-vis privacy in this era of computerization and telecommunications networks, particularly access to computerized public records in the aggregate. A recent California appellate court decision had this to say:
"There is a qualitative difference between obtaining information from a specific docket or on a specified individual, [and] from obtaining docket information on every person against whom criminal charges are pending in the municipal court. ... It is the aggregate nature of the information which makes it valuable to respondent; it is that same quality which makes its dissemination constitutionally dangerous." [emphasis added] (Westbrook v. Los Angeles Co. et al., 27 Cal. App. 4th 157 (1994))
The plaintiff, Robert Westbrook, a vendor of criminal background information doing business as Crimeline, wanted to purchase a computer tape from the LA Municipal Court System in order to process it and resell it to interested parties. Typically, purchasers of such information are commercial information brokers, private investigators and employment background check firms.
The court ruled against Westbrook in the case, citing privacy considerations. In addition, the court said that Westbrook's use of the data over time could amount to the creation of virtual "rap sheets" on individuals (criminal histories), compilations which are considered confidential under California law (Penal Code 13300). Contrary to the Westbrook case, however, other courts have *not prevented* the unfettered access to and use of computerized public records in the aggregate.
These hearings are important because they will shape the access to and use of electronic court records in California, and perhaps other jurisdictions who study California's court policies, for years to come.
I hope you will take the time to attend one of these hearings and present your testimony, or provide written testimony. Please contact me if you want any additional background information. -- Beth Givens, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (bgivens@acusd.edu).
OFFICIAL COURT ANNOUNCEMENT FOLLOWS **
TO Court Administrators Executive Officers of the California Trial Courts Persons and Organizations Interested in Access to Court Data
FROM Subcommittee on Privacy and Access of the Judicial Council Standing Advisory Committee on Court Technology Hon. Judith D. Ford, Chair
DATE August 22, 1995
SUBJECT Invitation to Comment: Policies on Privacy and Access Rights
In January 1995 the Judicial Council of California established a Standing Advisory Committee on Court Technology to "promote, coordinate, and facilitate acquisition and implementation of information and communication technologies useful and appropriate to the courts" (Rule of Court 1033(a)).
The Court Technology Committee subsequently established a Subcommittee on Privacy and Access to draft policies that the Court Technology Committee will consider for recommendation to the Judicial Council. If approved and promulgated by the council, the policies would establish norms governing privacy rights in and access rights to data that is maintained electronically by the California courts.
To assist it in its drafting effort, the Subcommittee on Privacy and Access is inviting comment on the following and any other related issues:
How to comment:
Send your comments before October 18, 1995 to:
Administrative Office of the Courts Attention: Victor Rowley 303 Second Street, South Tower San Francisco CA 94107-1366 Fax 415/396-9323
You are also invited to attend one of two public hearings that will be hosted by Judge Judith D. Ford, the chair of the subcommittee.
On Friday, September 29, a hearing will be held in San Francisco at the Commonwealth Club at 595 Market Street from 9 a.m. until 2 p.m.
On Thursday, October 19, 1995, a hearing will be held in Torrance in the City Council chambers of Torrance City Hall at 3031 Torrance Blvd. from 11:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.
If you are interested in testifying before the subcommittee, you must request a place on the hearing agenda in advance. To request a place on the agenda, please contact Victor Rowley at the above address, or you may also reach him by telephone at 415/396-9271 or via Internet email at Victor_Rowley@aoc.jud.state.ca.us.
Each speaker will be allotted ten minutes to address the subcommittee and will be placed on the agenda on a first-come, first-served basis. The last hour of the hearing will be available for the testimony of those who have not contacted Mr. Rowley prior to the meeting. Speakers who want to testify during this hour should sign up upon arrival at the meeting site and provide their comments in writing. Each speaker will be permitted ten minutes to testify. At the hearing, you must provide a written summary of your comments for the record.
We encourage you to circulate this invitation to comment to others. ```
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.