DeLoge v. DeSoto County Sheriff's Department
| Docket Number: | 2015-CP-01590-COA Linked Case(s): 2015-CP-01590-COA ; 2015-CT-01590-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-14-2017 Opinion Author: Lee, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Public records request - Conversion of motion - M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) - M.R.C.P. 56 - Investigative reports - Section 25-61-12(2)(a) - Section 25-61-3 - Confrontation Clause Judge(s) Concurring: Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Carlton, Fair, Wilson and Greenlee, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Westbrooks, J., without separate written opinion Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-25-2015 Appealed from: DESOTO COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: HON. MITCHELL M. LUNDY JR. Disposition: Granted DeSoto County Sheriff's Department's motion to dismiss Case Number: 14-cv-352 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Steven A. DeLoge |
STEVEN A. DELOGE (PRO SE) |
|
|
| Appellee: | DeSoto County Sheriff's Department, Sheriff Bill Rasco, In His Official Capacity, and Lent Rice, Director of Internal Affairs, In His Official Capacity | ROBERT E. QUIMBY | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Public records request - Conversion of motion - M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) - M.R.C.P. 56 - Investigative reports - Section 25-61-12(2)(a) - Section 25-61-3 - Confrontation Clause |
| Summary of the Facts: | Steven DeLoge is currently serving six consecutive life sentences in Wyoming for the sexual abuse of a minor. In February 1999, DeLoge resided with Katherine Lowery in Olive Branch. Lowery disappeared around that date. DeLoge departed from Mississippi with Lowery’s children. He was arrested in November 1999 in Wyoming for sexually abusing Lowery’s eight-year-old daughter. Following his guilty plea, evidence that had been collected by Wyoming officials and the FBI was forwarded to the DeSoto County Sheriff’s Department to assist in its investigation of the disappearance of Lowery, in which DeLoge was a suspect. In 2013, DeLoge submitted a public-records request under the Mississippi Public Records Act to DCSD, seeking records to indicate the physical location, itemized inventory, chain of custody, current condition, and status of all property and evidence obtained or transferred to DCSD from Wyoming. DCSD responded to the public-records request with an inventory sheet provided to it by the FBI and informed DeLoge that the items were in DCSD’s evidence-storage room. DCSD further advised DeLoge that under the Act, they were not subject to production of the documents and items because the missing-person investigation of Lowery was still in active status. DeLoge filed a public-opinion request with the Mississippi Ethics Commission. The Mississippi Ethics Commission found that the records sought by DeLoge were investigative reports under section 25-61-3(f) and thus exempted from production under section 25-61-12. DeLoge then filed a complaint against DCSD in chancery court. DCSD moved to dismiss DeLoge’s complaint. The chancery court granted DeLoge’s motion for an in camera review to determine whether the disputed documents and items were investigative and thus exempt under the Act. In its final ruling, the chancery court stated that upon review, it could not make the determination that the documents and items were not relevant—as DeLoge argued—to the missing-person investigation in DeSoto County. For that reason, the court granted DCSD’s motion to dismiss. DeLoge appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | DeLoge argues that the chancery court ruling is erroneous because the chancery court failed to convert the motion to an M.R.C.P. 56 summary-judgment proceeding and allow DeLoge to engage in further fact-finding or leave to amend his complaint. Whenever a trial judge converts an M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss into one for summary judgment by considering matters outside the pleadings, the judge must give all parties ten days’ notice that he is converting the motion. A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim limits the matters that the trial court may consider. However, the court may consider the contents of the complaint, the documents attached to the complaint, and the documents that are referred to in the complaint if they are central to the plaintiff’s claim, even though they are not attached to the complaint. Here, the chancery court granted DCSD’s motion to dismiss after its in camera review of the documents and items submitted by DCSD. The chancery court’s review of this evidence was not outside of the pleadings. Furthermore, the review was conducted at the request of DeLoge pursuant to his complaint that these items were central to his claim. With regard to the chancery court’s ruling, section 25-61-12(2)(a) provides, “When in the possession of a law enforcement agency, investigative reports shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter . . . .” Section 25-61-3 defines “investigative report.” Here, the chancery court’s determination that the documents and items within DCSD’s possession were investigative is not error. DeLoge also argues that his constitutional rights were violated by DCSD’s retention of the documents and items at issue. The documents and items at issue were seized under a search warrant issued in Wyoming and were transferred to DCSD only at the close of the Wyoming case against DeLoge. DCSD has the authority to keep and maintain control of the property until it is no longer needed in the investigation, which is still ongoing. DeLoge also argues that his constitutional rights were violated because he was not present when the chancery court announced its ruling. However, this was a civil action in which DeLoge was the plaintiff—not a criminal action in which he was the defendant. Therefore, the Confrontation Clause is not implicated so as to require DeLoge’s presence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
