State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Pike Cnty. Gen. Health Dist.
| Decision Date | 17 March 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 16CA873,16CA873 |
| Citation | 2017 Ohio 1084,80 N.E.3d 517 |
| Parties | STATE of Ohio, EX REL. The CINCINNATI ENQUIRER, Relator, v. PIKE COUNTY GENERAL HEALTH DISTRICT, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
John C. Greiner and Darren W. Ford, Graydon Head & Ritchey, LLP, Cincinnati, Ohio, for relator.
Michael DeWine, Ohio Attorney General, and Sarah E. Pierce and Ryan L. Richardson, Assistant Attorneys General, Columbus, Ohio, for respondents.
Michael H. Carpenter and Caitlin E. Vetter, Carpenter Lipps & Leland, LLP, Columbus, Ohio, urging denial of the writ for amicus curiae Ohio State Coroners Association.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
{¶ 1} Relator, The Cincinnati Enquirer, a division of Gannett Satellite Information Network, Inc. ("Enquirer"), seeks extraordinary relief in mandamus to compel the Pike County General Health District ("health district") and the Pike County Coroner ("coroner") to make the coroner's preliminary autopsy and investigative notes and findings regarding certain homicides available for inspection under the journalist exception in R.C. 313.10(D).
{¶ 2} First, because the requested records are not public records, as the Enquirer acknowledges, this case is governed by R.C. 313.10 instead of R.C. 149.43.
{¶ 3} Second, the Enquirer is not entitled to the requested extraordinary relief against the health district because R.C. 313.10(D) imposes no duty on the district to make the requested records available for inspection.
{¶ 4} Third, we reject the Enquirer's claim that the journalist exception applies to make a coroner's preliminary autopsy and investigative notes and findings subject to inspection by a journalist regardless of whether those records also contain records of a deceased individual that are confidential law enforcement investigatory records. The plain language of 313.10 establishes that confidential law enforcement investigatory records are not subject to the journalist exception of R.C. 313.10(D) insofar as they are contained within a coroner's preliminary autopsy and investigative notes and findings.
{¶ 5} Fourth, upon review of the unredacted requested records submitted by the coroner under seal, we agree with the coroner that the redactions to his preliminary autopsy and investigative notes and findings constitute confidential law enforcement investigatory records that are not subject to inspection by the Enquirer under R.C. 313.10(D). We thus deny the Enquirer's request for extraordinary relief in mandamus against the coroner.
{¶ 6} Finally, because we have denied the requested extraordinary relief in mandamus and the Enquirer does not argue in its merit briefs that it is entitled to an award of statutory damages and attorney fees, we deny its request for this additional relief as well.
{¶ 7} David R. Kessler, M.D., has served as the Pike County Coroner since 2005. The main duty of a coroner is to determine the manner and cause of death for every decedent who is not under the direct supervision of a physician when they die. See R.C. 313.09 (). R.C. 313.131(B)"authorizes coroners to perform an autopsy when the coroner believes an autopsy is necessary." Albrecht v. Treon , 118 Ohio St.3d 348, 2008-Ohio-2617, 889 N.E.2d 120, ¶ 29. As used in R.C. Chapter 313, " ‘autopsy’ means the external and internal examination of the body of a deceased person, including, but not limited to, gross visual inspection and dissection of the body and its internal organs, photographic or narrative documentation of findings, microscopic, radiological, toxicological, chemical, or other laboratory analyses performed in the discretion of the examining individual upon tissues, organs, blood, other bodily fluids, gases, or any other specimens and the retention for diagnostic and documentary purposes of tissues, organs, blood, other bodily fluids, gases, or any other specimens as the examining individual considers necessary to establish and defend against challenges to the cause and manner of death of the deceased person." R.C. 313.123(A)(1).
{¶ 8} Dr. Kessler is not a pathologist so he does not personally perform autopsies or related testing. Instead, the Pike County Coroner contracts with the Hamilton County Coroner to provide autopsy services. Having an experienced pathologist perform the autopsy ensures consistency and reliability of results.
{¶ 9} On those occasions in which he examines deaths in which foul play is suspected, Dr. Kessler works very closely with law enforcement to investigate and obtain justice for the deceased individual. Although he often knows the manner and cause of death in these cases, he will still order an autopsy to assist in the law enforcement investigation. Comprehensive physical and forensic examination of the body can provide important details to direct the law enforcement investigation and may provide important evidence in the case against the perpetrator.
{¶ 10} A preliminary autopsy is generally conducted within 24 hours. The pathologist conducts a physical examination of the body and takes blood and other samples for further testing. The preliminary autopsy report contains at least an initial impression of the cause of death. Final autopsy reports incorporate the full details of the physical examination and laboratory testing. According to Bureau of Criminal Investigation ("BCI") Special Agent Michael D. Trout, preliminary autopsy reports are important to investigators because they provide critical information about the cause and manner of death, the number of injuries, and specific details about those injuries.
{¶ 11} Once Dr. Kessler orders an autopsy, he notes on the death certificate that the case is pending investigation, which allows the deceased individual to be laid to rest.
{¶ 12} In April 2016, Hannah Gilley, Christopher Rhoden Jr., Christopher Rhoden Sr., Clarence Rhoden, Dana Rhoden, Gary Rhoden, Hanna Rhoden and Kenneth Rhoden were murdered in their homes in Pike County. Dr. Kessler met with BCI investigators to coordinate the examination of the four separate crime scenes. He quickly determined that the manner and cause of death of each victim was homicide by gunshot wound
, but ordered autopsies to assist the law enforcement investigation. The bodies were then transported by refrigerated trailer to the Hamilton County Coroner so that a pathologist could perform the autopsies.
{¶ 13} Dr. Kessler reviewed the preliminary and final autopsy reports for each of the eight victims and noted the manner and cause of death for each of them.
{¶ 14} On May 16, 2016, Kevin Grasha, a reporter for the Cincinnati Enquirer, sent an e-mail to Linda Murphy of the Pike County General Health District requesting under R.C. 149.43 Murphy serves as the clerk to the Pike County Coroner. Grasha's request included his name and title and stated that his request was being made because "the information is of great public interest."
{¶ 15} On May 24, 2016, Grasha sent a follow-up e-mail request to Murphy after he had not received a response to his public-records request.
{¶ 16} By letter dated May 25, 2016, Pike County Prosecuting Attorney Robert Junk, on behalf of Murphy and the Pike County General Health District, denied Grasha's request. Junk reasoned that based on precedent by the Supreme Court of Ohio ( State ex rel. Dayton Newspapers, Inc. v. Rauch , 12 Ohio St.3d 100, 465 N.E.2d 458 (1984), and State ex rel. Williams v. Cleveland , 64 Ohio St.3d 544, 597 N.E.2d 147 (1992) ), the contents of a county coroner's autopsy reports on homicide victims are exempt from disclosure as specific investigatory work product, trial preparation records, and confidential law enforcement investigatory material:
and the size of the wounds would serve no public interest. Rather, access to such information by those not involved in the investigation would hinder the public's right to have a full and complete investigation. Disclosure of such information would alert the killer(s) to what information law enforcement possesses. It would also make it virtually impossible for investigators to use these details to sort out false confessions and false claims made by any person of interest about this type of information.
Our primary, and only, interest in this matter is investigating and prosecuting the individual or individuals who perpetrated these murders. The release of the preliminary autopsy reports is not in the public interest. The public interest is best served by maintaining the integrity of the investigation into these homicides.
{¶ 17} On May 26, 2016, Grasha sent an e-mail to Prosecuting Attorney Junk, with a copy to Murphy, acknowledging the prosecutor's denial of his request to view the preliminary autopsy reports, identifying himself as a journalist employed by the Enquirer, listing the Enquirer's address, and specifying that granting his request was in the best interests of the public. This time, Grasha...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Pike Cnty. Gen. Health Dist.
...seal for in camera inspection.{¶ 7} On March 17, 2017, the court of appeals denied the Enquirer's request for a writ of mandamus. 2017-Ohio-1084, 80 N.E.3d 517. The court of appeals first held that no writ could be issued against the Pike County General Health District, as R.C. 313.10(D) ap......