Governor’s office ordered to turn over some documents in juvenile lifers case

Listen to this article

The governor’s office will have to turn over a half-dozen risk assessments prepared by the parole commission to plaintiffs challenging the parole system’s treatment of juvenile lifers, a federal magistrate judge has ruled.

Other than the risk assessments, Judge J. Mark Coulson on Wednesday either sided with the state and denied the motion or said he will rule later when more information is available.

The state, during oral arguments Tuesday, objected on privacy grounds to turning over risk assessments for individuals not named in the lawsuit because they contain highly personal information. But Coulson ruled the plaintiffs “should be given some insight into the types of information collected and its potential role in the process.” He ordered the state to redact and produce three assessments for juvenile lifers and three for adult lifers.

The state will not have to provide documents relating to pending decisions on the parole commission’s recommendations for commutation of juvenile offenders or provide materials prior to 2004 when the current parole commissioner took office, according to Coulson.

Documents relating to the specific recommendations of the parole commission are covered by executive privilege because they pertain to the deliberative process, Coulson wrote, and the letters prepared for each inmate are to assist the governor’s decision. Factual information contained in already-decided commutation files should be turned over, he wrote.

The plaintiffs had also argued for materials dating back to 1995, when then-Gov. Parris N. Glendening announced he would grant parole for anyone serving a life sentence. Coulson said the state’s offer of more than 12 years’ worth of information was reasonable and proportional.

“Even if, for the sake of argument, current policy was influenced by prior administrations, it is the policy itself and its current implementation by these specific defendants that is at issue in this case,” Coulson wrote.

The judge did not rule on the state’s attorney-client privilege and attorney-work product claims because a log detailing the documents subject to those claims has not yet been prepared. Coulson said with the log, he will be able to rule on specific documents the plaintiffs might challenge.

The case is Maryland Restorative Justice Initiative et al. v. Gov. Larry Hogan et al., No. 1:16-cv-01021-ELH.