GRO denies Brown’s appeal against Attorney General’s Office; director finds no withheld AGO records

Director Pearson denied an appeal by Mr. Brown challenging the Attorney General’s Office’s records production, concluding the petitioner failed to show the AGO possessed additional responsive records and that the AGO appropriately treated shared materials under GRAMA.

Mr. Brown, who represented himself, told the panel he had requested records relating to investigations and alleged inconsistencies in police and prosecutor materials. He challenged what he described as missing investigative notes, body‑worn camera footage and 911 recordings and repeatedly asked AGO counsel to “show me the records” the office relied on in reaching its conclusions.

AGO counsel (Mr. Franklin) responded that the AGO’s role in the underlying matters was limited to reviewing how the Unified Police Department handled case CO2521323 and that the office had not conducted independent investigations into Brown’s domestic matters. “The AG’s office has not conducted any investigations into Mr. Brown’s underlying domestic matters,” Franklin said, and he explained that records produced by the police department are shared records that cannot be provided by the AGO under GRAMA.

Director Pearson said he had reviewed the materials submitted and found Brown had not met his burden to show the AGO failed to conduct a reasonable search or that it had concealed or destroyed records. He also found the AGO’s redactions and classifications appropriate under the cited GRAMA provisions and denied the appeal, noting a written decision would follow within seven business days and specifying appeal rights.