As of September 5, 2022, Freedom of Information Commission meetings and contested case hearings will resume being conducted in person. All parties and witnesses must appear in person for their contested case hearings and Commission meetings. Please access this link or contact the Commission for further information.

Final Decision FIC2013-113
In the Matter of a Complaint by
FINAL DECISION
Benjamin Sutton,
     Complainant
     against
Docket #FIC 2013-113
Chief, Police Department, City of Stamford;
and Police Department, City of Stamford,
     Respondents
October 23, 2013

     The above-captioned matter was heard as contested case on September 18, 2013, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared. The complainant, who is incarcerated, appeared via teleconference, pursuant to the January 2004 memorandum of understanding between the Commission and the Department of Correction.  See Docket No. CV 03-0826293, Anthony Sinchak v. FOIC et al, Superior Court, J.D. of Hartford at Hartford, Corrected Order dated January 27, 2004 (Sheldon, J.).
     At the hearing, the complainant stated that he had written a letter dated August 15, 2013 to counsel for the City of Stamford inquiring about a settlement of his case and expressing the “hope that we can come to an amicable agreement prior to the scheduled FOIA commission hearing”. The respondents represented that, on February 14, 2013, their Records Division had sent the contents of their relevant file to the complainant. The hearing officer reviewed each of the seven categories of requested records with the parties. The parties agreed that the complainant had received all non-exempt records within the scope of his January 14, 2013 request, except possibly fingerprint records. Counsel for the respondents agreed to investigate whether relevant fingerprint records existed in the computer database where such records are generally scanned. He further agreed, within ten days, to either furnish relevant fingerprints to the complainant or write to the complainant explaining why fingerprint records were not provided. The complainant at this point stated that the case was resolved and that he wished to withdraw his complaint against the respondents. No matters required adjudication.
     The Commission recommends the following order on the basis of the record:
     1. Based on the withdrawal of the complaint, the case is hereby dismissed.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 23, 2013.

__________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
Benjamin Sutton #312460
MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution
1153 East Street South
Suffield, CT 06080
Chief, Police Department, City of Stamford;
and Police Department, City of Stamford
c/o Burt Rosenberg, Esq.
Chris Dellaselva, Esq.
Office of Legal Affairs
888 Washington Blvd.
P.O. Box 10152
Stamford, CT  06904-2150
____________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC/2013-113/FD/cac/10/23/2013