E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR JACKSON COUNTY

SYCAMORE MEDIA )
CORPORATION d/b/a THE ) Case No. EQCV028693
MAQUOKETA SENTINEL-PRESS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) RULING ON PETITION FOR
) WRIT OF INJUNCTION, OR IN
The CITY OF MAQUOKETA, IOWA, ) THE ALTERNATIVE, WRIT OF
POLICE DEPARTMENT, ) MANDAMUS
)
Defendant. )

On June 9, 2020, the Petition for Writ of Injunction, or in the Alternative, Writ of

Mandamus came before the Court for telephonic oral argument. The Plaintiff was represented by

Attorneys Molly Parker and Samuel Jones. The Defendant was represented by Attorney Matthew

Novak. After having considered the evidence presented, the written and oral arguments of

counsel, and the applicable law, the Court enters the following ruling on the pending motion.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In the early morning hours of April 6, 2019, Nicholas Shannon called 911 and reported

that his girlfriend, Amanda Lassance, was in her car parked beside the highway in Clinton

County, just south of the Jackson County line. Shannon reported that he and Lassance had been

drinking and that Lassance attacked him in the moving vehicle.

Officers from the Clinton County Sheriff’s Department, Jackson County Sheriff’s

Department, and Maquoketa Police Department responded to the scene. The officers were

familiar with Lassance because she is an Assistant Jackson County Attorney, whose

responsibilities include prosecuting DUI violations. Officers found Lassance in her vehicle and

1
 E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

noted several indicators of impairment, including empty beer cans, bloodshot eyes, and slurred

speech. Nevertheless, the officers declined to administer a sobriety test.

Although Maquoketa police officers were the first to arrive on the scene, they left soon

after the Clinton and Jackson County sheriff’s deputies arrived. The sheriff’s deputies arranged

for Lassance to be driven to her office at the Jackson County courthouse. Later that morning,

another Jackson County sheriff’s deputy drove Lassance back to her car. Lassance ultimately

pled guilty to being the driver of the car and to having an open container of alcohol in the

vehicle.

Several days after the incident, a reporter from the Maquoketa Sentinel-Press (“Sentinel-

Press”) noticed Lassance’s name on a dispatch call log. The Sentinel-Press sought more

information on the incident by filing open records requests with the Clinton County Sheriff’s

Department, Jackson County Sheriff’s Department, and Maquoketa Police Department. The

Clinton and Jackson County sheriff’s departments provided all the requested information. The

Maquoketa Police Department provided written records but declined to turn over squad car or

body camera footage. On November 11, 2019, the Sentinel-Press filed this action, seeking the

withheld footage from the Maquoketa Police Department.

ANALYSIS

Iowa Code chapter 22 is the Iowa Open Records Act. The Act establishes that public

records are generally available to the public, subject to specified exceptions. See Mitchell v. City

of Cedar Rapids, 926 N.W.2d 222, 229 (Iowa 2019). “‘There is a presumption in favor of

disclosure’ and ‘a liberal policy in favor of access to public records.’” See id. (quoting Hall v.

Broadlawns Med. Ctr., 811 N.W.2d 478, 485 (Iowa 2012)). A government body seeking to

2
 E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

prevent disclosure of a public record bears the burden of proving the applicability of an

exception. See id.

In the present case, the Maquoketa Police Department has identified Iowa Code section

22.7(5) as its basis for withholding the footage.

The following public records shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise ordered
by a court, by the lawful custodian of the records, or by another person duly
authorized to release such information:

...

5. Peace officers’ investigative reports, privileged records or information specified

in section 80G.2, and specific portions of electronic mail and telephone billing
records of law enforcement agencies if that information is part of an ongoing
investigation, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in this Code.
However, the date, time, specific location, and immediate facts and circumstances
surrounding a crime or incident shall not be kept confidential under this section,
except in those unusual circumstances where disclosure would plainly and seriously
jeopardize an investigation or pose a clear and present danger to the safety of an
individual. Specific portions of electronic mail and telephone billing records may
only be kept confidential under this subsection if the length of time prescribed for
commencement of prosecution or the finding of an indictment or information under
the statute of limitations applicable to the crime that is under investigation has not
expired.

Iowa Code § 22.7(5).

Iowa Code section 22.7(5) creates a qualified privilege that is intended to provide

“assurance to all persons upon whom law enforcement officials rely that official confidentiality

attends their conversations and may protect from public access the officers' reports of what they

have said.” Mitchell, 926 N.W.2d at 230. “An official claiming the privilege must satisfy a three-

part test: (1) a public officer is being examined, (2) the communication was made in official

confidence, and (3) the public interest would suffer by disclosure.” See id. at 232 (quoting Hawk

Eye v. Jackson, 521 N.W.2d 750, 753 (Iowa 1994)).

3
 E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Determining where the line falls between public harm and public good requires
weighing the relative merits of the interests at stake. We have long recognized that
confidentiality encourages persons to come forward with information, whether
substantiated or not, that might be used to solve crimes and deter criminal activity.
Secrecy is especially vital where reports are based on confidential informants,
persons indispensable to successful police work but who frequently fear
intimidation and reprisal. Furthermore, nondisclosure permits law enforcement
officials the necessary privacy to discuss findings and theories about cases under
investigation.

See id. at 233 (quoting Hawk Eye, 521 N.W.2d at 753). “Other case-specific factors, such as the

nature of the investigation and whether it is completed or ongoing, may tip the balance in favor

of public disclosure.” Hawk Eye, 521 N.W.2d at 753.

In the present case, the Hawk Eye balancing test weighs strongly in favor of disclosing all

public records that the Sentinel-Press is seeking. The central incident of this case raises an

allegation that a prosecutor received lenient treatment when she herself was discovered

committing a criminal offense. The Iowa Supreme Court has noted multiple times that “[t]here

can be little doubt that allegations of leniency or cover-up with respect to the disciplining of

those sworn to enforce the law are matters of great public concern.” See Mitchell, 926 N.W.2d at

233 (quoting Hawk Eye, 521 N.W.2d at 754).

Other factors also weigh in favor of disclosure. The investigation into the incident is

officially closed, and no additional charges are being contemplated. Furthermore, this case does

not involve a confidential informant. Shannon’s report to the police is already public knowledge,

and there is no reason to believe that he will be harmed by the disclosure of the disputed public

records.

Although Maquoketa police officers had only limited involvement in the incident and no

control over the ultimate charging decision, the records they generated are significant because

4
 E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Maquoketa police officers were the first to arrive on the scene and interact with Lassance. Their

squad car and body camera footage will show a portion of the incident not found in the public

records already provided by the Clinton and Jackson County sheriff’s departments. This

information will give the public a fuller understanding of the incident in question.

RULING

For all of the above-stated reasons, it is the ruling of the Court that the Plaintiff’s Petition

for Writ of Injunction is GRANTED.

5
 E-FILED 2020 JUN 22 3:56 PM JACKSON - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

State of Iowa Courts

Type: OTHER ORDER

Case Number Case Title

EQCV028693 SYCAMORE MEDIA CORP V. CITY OF MAQUOKETA , IOWA
POLICE DEP

So Ordered

Electronically signed on 2020-06-22 15:56:19 page 6 of 6