Prison Legal News v. Executive Office for United States Attorneys
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 499, 628 F.3d 1243, 39 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1243 (2011)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Exemption 7(C), a government agency may withhold graphic death-scene images and related audio recordings from disclosure to protect the substantial personal privacy interests of a victim's surviving family members, even if the materials were previously shown in open court.
Facts:
- In October 1999, prisoners William Sablan and Rudy Sablan murdered their cellmate, Joey Jesus Estrella, at a federal penitentiary.
- Bureau of Prisons (BOP) personnel created a video recording of the aftermath, which depicted the crime scene and the mutilation of Estrella's body by the Sablans.
- BOP personnel also took still autopsy photographs of Estrella’s body.
- The videotape and autopsy photographs were introduced as unsealed evidence during the separate public murder trials of both William and Rudy Sablan.
- At trial, the video and photographs were shown in open court to the jury and the public audience.
- After the trials concluded, the evidence was returned to the custody of the United States Attorneys Office.
- Prison Legal News (PLN), an organization focused on prisoners' rights issues, later sought copies of the videotape and photographs.
Procedural Posture:
- Prison Legal News (PLN) submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) for the video and photos.
- EOUSA denied the request in full, and the Department of Justice denied PLN's subsequent administrative appeal.
- PLN filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court, alleging the withholding was improper.
- The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment.
- The district court granted in part and denied in part each motion, ordering the release of some material but allowing EOUSA to withhold the autopsy photos and the most graphic portion of the video.
- Both parties appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, but EOUSA later voluntarily dismissed its appeal.
- PLN, as the appellant, proceeded with its appeal against EOUSA, the appellee, in the Tenth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does FOIA Exemption 7(C) permit a government agency to withhold graphic video and autopsy photographs of a murdered prisoner, which were compiled for law enforcement purposes, based on the privacy interests of the victim's family, even when those materials were previously introduced as unsealed evidence in a public trial?
Opinions:
Majority - Murphy, Circuit Judge.
Yes. FOIA Exemption 7(C) permits the withholding of these records because their disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of the victim's family. The court recognized that family members have a significant and independent privacy interest in their deceased relative's death-scene images, an interest aimed at securing their own peace and tranquility. This privacy right is not derivative of the victim's own (diminished) expectation of privacy as a prisoner. The family did not waive this interest, as they took no affirmative action to place the images in the public domain, and the government's use of the evidence at trial cannot waive an individual's private rights. While the images were shown in court, this limited disclosure did not eliminate the family's privacy interest, as the images are not otherwise publicly available. Balancing this strong privacy interest against the public interest in disclosure, the court found the public interest to be minimal. The information about government conduct that PLN sought to reveal was already in the public record through trial testimony and media reports, so releasing the graphic images themselves would add little to the public's understanding of agency performance and would be outweighed by the severe invasion of the family's privacy.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies and expands the privacy protections afforded to victims' families under FOIA Exemption 7(C), following the Supreme Court's precedent in National Archives and Records Admin. v. Favish. The court establishes that a family's privacy interest in graphic death-scene images is robust, independent of the victim's own rights, and is not easily waived by prior, limited public disclosures like use in a courtroom. It also narrowly construes the "public domain doctrine," holding that it does not compel disclosure if the core purpose of the FOIA exemption—in this case, protecting family privacy—can still be served. This ruling makes it more difficult for requesters to obtain graphic law enforcement materials involving deceased individuals by claiming a waiver or prior disclosure, thereby strengthening the hand of government agencies withholding such records on privacy grounds.
