Glen D. Alcorn v. State of Tennessee Metro Police Department

GLEN D. ALCORN, )
)
Appellant, )
) Appeal No.
) 01-A-01-9507-CH-00315
VS. )
) Davidson Chancery
) No. 94-2992-II
STATE OF TENNESSEE, )
METRO POLICE DEPARTMENT, )
Appellee.
)
)
FILED
December 14,
2001
COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate Court Clerk
APPEALED FROM THE CHANCERY COURT OF DAVIDSON COUNTY
AT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE
THE HONORABLE C. ALLEN HIGH, CHANCELLOR
THE HONORABLE ELLEN HOBBS LYLE, CHANCELLOR
GLEN D. ALCORN, PRO SE
Lake County Regional Prison
Route 1, box 330
Tiptonville, Tennessee 38079
Pro Se Appellant
CHARLES W. BURSON
Attorney General & Reporter
MERRILYN FEIRMAN
Assistant Attorney General
500 Charlotte Avenue
Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0491
Attorney for Appellee
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED
BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE
CONCUR:
LEWIS, J.
KOCH, J.
OPINION
Glen Alcorn, an inmate in the custody of the Tennessee Department of
Correction, petitioned the Chancery Court of Davidson County for an order that he be
furnished with copies of certain documents that he believed would be helpful in the
appeal of his conviction. Mr. Alcorn asked the chancery court to compel the State of
Tennessee to provide him with the transcript of jury voir dire in his trial, and to compel
the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department to provide him with a copy of the
investigative file in his case. The court dismissed Mr. Alcorn's petition on the ground
of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm the dismissal.
I.
Mr. Alcorn apparently believes that the transcript of the voir dire will
show that the court permitted the empanelment of a jury that was prejudiced against
him because of the nature of the crime for which he was charged. His affidavit of
indigency is in the record. Tennessee law provides a mechanism for indigent criminal
defendants to obtain trial transcripts where necessary for the preparation of an
appeal. Tenn Code Ann. § 40-13-309 states:
Partial transcript of record. -- Upon the direction of the
court in the case of an indigent defendant, or at the request
of any party who has agreed to pay the fee therefor a reporter
designated by the court shall transcribe from the original
records such parts of the proceedings as are requested in the
manner prescribed by the Tennessee Rules of Appellate
Procedure.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-13-301 indicates that not every court has the
authority to direct the preparation of a trial transcript in a criminal case:
-2-
Definitions. -- The following words, terms and phrases, when
used in this part, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in
this section, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
(1) "Court" means any court of this State exercising
jurisdiction over any criminal action which is punishable by
confinement in the state penitentiary.
....
The criminal court would be the proper place to file a petition asking for
a transcript of the voir dire. The chancery court does not have jurisdiction over
criminal actions. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-10-102. The chancery court acted
correctly in denying this portion of Mr. Alcorn's petition.
II.
Mr. Alcorn's second request is for a copy of the investigative police files
in his case. He correctly cites Memphis Publishing Co. v. Holt, 719 S.W.2d 513(Tenn. 1986) for the proposition that a closed investigative file of a municipal police
department is a public record, subject to inspection by members of the public under
Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503. He has filed this portion of his petition in the proper
court for judicial review of official actions which deny access to public records. See
Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-505(b).
However, we do not believe that Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503 requires
that the police supply Mr. Alcorn with a copy of the file in question, nor are we aware
of any other law that would require them to do so under the circumstances of this
case. Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503 reads in pertinent part:
Records open to public inspection -- Exceptions. -- (a) All
state, county and municipal records . . . shall at all times,
during business hours, be open for personal inspection by
any citizen of Tennessee, and those in charge of such
records shall not refuse such right of inspection to any citizen
unless otherwise provided by state law.
-3-
The duty of a custodian of public records is to the public at large, rather
than to particular members of the public who may feel that they have a special interest
in the contents of a particular record. Of course a custodian may not erect
unnecessary obstacles to make the public right of access difficult to exercise, but the
right to inspect records "during business hours" in no way implies an obligation to
supply copies of those records to individuals who are unable to appear in person at
the place where the records are kept.
We are aware that under the authority of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S.
83, 10 L.Ed 2d 215, 83 S.Ct. 1194 (1963), and its progeny, the prosecution must,
upon request, turn over to the accused any exculpatory evidence in its possession
relating to the accused's guilt or innocence. This sometimes includes material
contained in police investigative files. Under some circumstances, a request is not
even required to trigger a prosecutor's duty to provide the defendant with exculpatory
evidence. See State v. Marshall, 845 S.W.2d 228, 232 (Tenn.Cr.App. 1992). But the
court to which the request for this information should be directed is the court in which
the criminal charge is pending.
We do not believe that Brady v. Maryland, supra, and the line of cases
that follow it imply a general right of convicted persons to the entire contents of the
investigative files in their cases. Nor has Mr. Alcorn alleged that the file he seeks
contains exculpatory material of any kind.
III.
-4-
We affirm the order of the trial court. Remand this cause to the
Chancery Court of Davidson County for any further proceedings consistent with this
opinion. Tax the costs of appeal to the appellant.
_____________________________
BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE
CONCUR:
_______________________________
SAMUEL L. LEWIS, JUDGE
_______________________________
WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE
-5-