The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has upheld a decision that dismissed an appeal from Glue Wilkins regarding a request for documents from the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General (OAG). The court ruled that the Office of Open Records (OOR) did not have jurisdiction over the appeal, which is significant for individuals seeking access to government records under the Right-to-Know Law (RTKL).

This ruling affects those who file requests for public records, as it clarifies the jurisdictional boundaries between the OOR and the OAG. Understanding these limits is crucial for anyone attempting to access government documents in Pennsylvania.

Background

Glue Wilkins, also known as Allen L. Wilkins, Sr., filed a request on December 27, 2024, under the RTKL. He sought documents related to the processing of a 'Notice of Appeal' in a case against David J. Close. However, Wilkins did not specify a docket number for the referenced court case, which is a critical detail for such requests.

Wilkins asserted that the documents he requested were filed under the Commonwealth’s Criminal History Record Information Act (CHRIA) on December 17, 2023. However, he did not explain how CHRIA entitled him to access the requested documents. After the OAG failed to respond, Wilkins appealed to the OOR on January 13, 2025. The OOR dismissed his appeal on January 23, 2025, for lack of jurisdiction.

The Ruling

The Commonwealth Court reviewed the OOR's decision and affirmed it, stating that the OOR lacked jurisdiction over the appeal. The court explained, “The OOR lacks jurisdiction. The [OAG] is a Commonwealth agency that is not subject to the jurisdiction of the OOR.” This ruling was made by a per curiam opinion, meaning it was issued by the court as a whole rather than attributed to a single judge.

The court clarified that jurisdiction over appeals related to requests made to the OAG is specifically designated to an appeals officer appointed by the OAG itself, not the OOR. The court cited Section 503(d)(1) of the RTKL, which states, “The [OAG] . . . shall designate an appeals officer to hear appeals under Chapter 11.” Thus, the OOR correctly determined that it did not have the authority to hear Wilkins' appeal.

Impact

This ruling has important implications for individuals seeking access to public records in Pennsylvania. It reinforces the notion that the OAG has its own procedures for handling appeals related to RTKL requests. Therefore, individuals must direct their appeals to the appropriate agency rather than relying on the OOR.

The decision also emphasizes the importance of providing sufficient details in requests for records, such as docket numbers, to ensure that agencies can properly respond. This case serves as a reminder to requesters about the necessity of understanding the jurisdictional landscape when filing RTKL requests.

What's Next

Wilkins may have the option to appeal this decision to a higher court, but details regarding any potential next steps were not available in the court filing. There is no information about a related case pending at this time.