U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation: 1997 Overview Current status of the law Summary of State statutes by category by State Criminal History Record Information April 1998, NCJ-168964 ------------------------------------------------------------------ This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#cspsl ------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director This report was prepared by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, Kenneth E. Bischoff, Chairman, and Gary R. Cooper, Executive Director. The project director was Sheila J. Barton, Deputy Director. Paul L. Woodard, Senior Counsel, prepared the report. Twyla R. Cunningham, Manager, Corporate Communications, edited the report. Jane L. Bassett, Publishing Assistant, and Terri E. Nyberg, Executive Secretary, provided layout and design assistance. The project was conducted under the direction of Carol G. Kaplan, Chief, Criminal History Improvement Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Report of work performed under BJS Cooperative Agreement No. 96-BJ-CX-K010 awarded to SEARCH Group, Incorporated, 7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145, Sacramento, California 95831. Contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Bureau of Justice Statistics or the U.S. Department of Justice. Copyright SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, 1997 The U.S. Department of Justice authorizes any person to reproduce, publish, translate or otherwise use all or any part of the copyrighted material in the publication with the exception of those items indicating that they are copyrighted by or reprinted by permission of any source other than SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics. -------------- Foreword -------------- This updated edition of the Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1997 Overview is the tenth in the series of Bureau of Justice Statistics' publications referencing and analyzing State laws, administrative regulations, and attorneys general's opinions relating to the security, confidentiality, accuracy and completeness of criminal history records. The first Compendium was published in 1974 in conjunction with the development and issuance by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration of the Department of Justice regulations on privacy and security of criminal history record information. Subsequent editions have been published in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1992, 1994 and now the current 1997 edition. The purpose of the volumes continues to be assistance to legislators, planners, administrators, legal analysts and other researchers in reviewing and contrasting the varying approaches the States have taken to issues concerned with the maintenance and use of criminal records. With such information available, States are able to take a more enlightened approach to criminal record policymaking. It is the hope of the Bureau of Justice Statistics that this report will be a resource for policymakers in improving and promoting the Nation's criminal history records. The efficient operation of complete and accurate record systems serves to benefit us all. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Section 1: Review and analysis A. Current status of the law B. Analysis of critical issues 1. Data quality 2. Access to criminal history records for noncriminal justice purposes Section 2: Classification category definitions Section 3: Summary tables of statutes and regulations by classification category A. Survey comparison of changes in State statutes and regulations by classification category B. Summary of State statutes and regulations by classification category 1. State regulatory authority 2. Privacy and security council 3. Dissemination regulations 4. Inspection 5. Right to challenge 6. Judicial review of challenged information 7. Purging nonconviction information 8. Purging conviction information 9. Sealing nonconviction information 10. Sealing conviction information 11. Removal of disqualifications 12. Right to state nonexistence of record 13. Research access 14. Accuracy and completeness 15. Dedication 16. Civil remedies 17. Criminal penalties 18. Public records 19. Separation of files 20. Regulation of intelligence collection 21. Regulation of intelligence dissemination 22. Security 23. Transaction logs 24. Training employees 25. Listing of information systems 26. Freedom of Information Act (including criminal justice information) 27. Freedom of Information Act (excluding criminal justice information) 28. Central State repository Section 4: Summary tables of statutes and regulations by State State code titles Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming The full text (approximately 1,500 pages, order No. NCJ-151623) of legislation cited in this document is available in microfiche for $2 or in hard copy for $184 from: Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse P.O. Box 179 Annapolis Junction, Maryland 20701-0179 1-800-732-3277 ------------------------- Introduction The Compendium series ------------------------- This Compendium is the latest in a series of 10 U.S. Department of Justice publications that reference and analyze State laws and regulations relating to privacy and security of criminal history record information. -1 [The term "criminal history record information" is defined in the Department of Justice regulations to include "information collected by criminal justice agencies on individuals consisting of identifiable descriptions and notations of arrests, detentions, indictments, informations, or other formal criminal charges, and any disposition arising therefrom, sentencing, correctional supervision, and release." 28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.3(b) (1993).] These compendia include: (1) compilations of State laws and administrative regulations, and (2) analyses of findings and trends reflected in that body of law and policy documents. The purpose of these compendia is to assist legislators, planners, administrators, legal analysts and other interested individuals in reviewing State statutes and regulations governing the maintenance and use of criminal records and in analyzing national trends in this important area. Comparing and contrasting the various approaches reflected in the many State laws and regulations cited in these documents should assist planners and administrators to develop effective and fair policies for their jurisdictions. By facilitating such comparisons and by furthering research in this area, the compendia are intended to promote the evolution of enlightened privacy and information policy. -------------------------------------------- The first compendium was published by the Law Enforcement Assistance -------------------------------------------- Administration (LEAA) in 1974 as part of its efforts connected with the promulgation of regulations covering the privacy and security of criminal history record information. -2 [U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Office of General Counsel, Compendium of State Laws Governing the Privacy and Security of Criminal Justice Information (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1974).] A second compendium, published in 1978, documented the growth of State privacy and security laws subsequent to the earlier survey. -3 [U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service, Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information, Compendium of State Legislation (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January 1978).] At that time, LEAA also published a companion document that provided an overview of the significant changes in State laws that had occurred, largely as a result of the impact of the Federal regulations, and analyzed policy issues in specific areas of privacy and security law. -4 [U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: An Analysis of Privacy Issues (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1978).] Updating supplements to those compendia were published in 1979 and in 1981, covering State legislation and regulations up to July 1981.-5 [U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service, Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Legislation, 1979 Supplement, by SEARCH Group, Inc. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1979); U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Legislation, 1981 Supplement, by SEARCH Group, Inc. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1982).] The 1984, 1987, 1989, 1992 and 1994 volumes replaced all of the earlier volumes in the series and referenced all State laws and regulations up to the dates of publication. -6 [U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1984 Edition: Overview, by SEARCH Group, Inc. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, September 1985); Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1987 Overview, by SEARCH Group, Inc. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, August 1988); Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1989 Overview, by SEARCH Group, Inc. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, April 1990); Criminal History Record Information: Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1992, by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, July 1992); Privacy and Security of Criminal History Information: Compendium of State Privacy and Security Legislation, 1994 Overview, by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, January 1995).] Scope of this Compendium This Compendium is an up-to-date and complete document that replaces all of the earlier volumes in the series. It references all current State laws up to July 1997, as well as regulations, executive orders and opinions of State attorneys general where applicable. It also includes a review and analysis section containing a general overview of State laws and regulations and a discussion of trends and conclusions concerning two especially important information policy issues: (1) requirements imposed on criminal justice agencies to maintain record quality, and (2) dissemination and use of criminal history information for noncriminal justice purposes. Since this volume compiles the material from previous compendia, as well as more recent enactments, the sheer bulk of this body of material precludes continuing the practice of reproducing the complete text of the State laws and regulations. The complete set of statutes is available on microfiche or in hard copy format from the Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse in Annapolis Junction, Maryland. (A fee applies for either format. See page vii for ordering information.) A full, hard-copy library of these laws, regulations and other materials is maintained by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, at its offices in Sacramento, California. Copies of specific enactments may be ordered by mail or telephone. -7 [SEARCH is located at 7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145, Sacramento, California 95831, (916) 392-2550.] This Compendium contains four sections. Section 1 sets out an overview of State criminal history record laws and an analysis of State requirements relating to data quality and noncriminal justice access and use. Section 2 defines the 28 subject-matter categories into which the laws and regulations are classified in the tables in the Compendium. These categories are the same as those used in previous volumes. Section 3 sets out summary tables showing trends and developments in criminal justice information law and policy by classification category. Section 4 sets out summary tables of criminal justice information statutes and regulations by State, along with a list of the titles of the State codes (see page 47) from which the citations were extracted. All of the tables in Sections 3 and 4 set out complete citations to the official State codes or other State compilations where the full text of the laws and regulations may be found. These citations should be used in ordering copies of particular provisions from BJS or SEARCH. The methodology used in compiling the Compendium included a survey of State officials concerned with criminal record programs and policy, followed by extensive library research in the State codes to verify and augment survey responses. The survey and research compiled the laws of 53 jurisdictions: the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. In the Compendium, all of these jurisdictions are referred to as "States." -------------------------------------------- How to use the Compendium -------------------------------------------- Because this volume is a complete compilation of all prior compendia and supplements, it will not be necessary to consult prior volumes. To facilitate use of this volume, the laws and regulations have been classified into 28 subject-matter categories that are defined in Section 2. Numerous tables are included in Sections 3 and 4 to assist readers in finding laws dealing with particular subjects or to determine which aspects of information policy are addressed by particular States. The summary tables in Section 3 list citations to all State statutes and regulations under each of the 28 classification categories. For example, the table for the category "State regulatory authority" (page 17) indicates which of the States have provisions establishing or designating an agency to promulgate statewide regulations governing criminal history records and provides the legal citations to the provisions. In addition to finding particular citations, the reader is able to quickly identify the concentration of States addressing a particular policy area. Another view of State privacy and security trends is reflected in the table on page 15 titled "Survey comparison of changes in State statutes and regulations by classification category." At a glance, the table indicates the degree of attention that a particular area of information policy has received in the States over the past 23 years, as reflected by surveys conducted in 1974, 1977, 1979, 1981, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1991 and 1994. A summary table for each State is included in Section 4. These tables use the 28 classification categories referred to above and set out citations to all of the laws and regulations of particular States. If no entry appears under one or more classification categories for a particular State, it means that the State has no law or regulation addressing that policy area, or that research has failed to discover any. The State summary tables presented in Section 4 include subdivisions of four classification categories. Category 3, "Dissemination Regulations," is subdivided to show whether the States permit or prohibit access by various types of groups or individuals (criminal justice agencies, governmental noncriminal justice agencies and private agencies or individuals) to various types of information (conviction, nonconviction and arrest information). Category 4, "Inspection," is subdivided to show whether the States permit an individual to inspect his criminal history record; inspect his record and take notes; or inspect his record and obtain a copy of information contained in that record. Category 14, "Accuracy and Completeness," is subdivided to permit statutes to be classified as relating to disposition reporting, auditing, or other accuracy and completeness requirements. Finally, Category 22, "Security," is subdivided to enable statutes to be classified as relating to physical, administrative or computer security. These classification subdivisions should present a more accurate and detailed view of State legislative and regulatory activity in these four important policy areas and will make the Compendium a more useful research tool. -------------------------------------------- Section 1: Review and analysis A. Current status of the law -------------------------------------------- In the early 1970s, at a time when public concern about privacy, automation and mushrooming information systems was at its height, Congress considered several legislative proposals that would have imposed a uniform nationwide information management scheme for State and local handling of criminal history record information. Although Congress did not enact comprehensive legislation, in 1973 it did adopt an amendment to the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (now Section 812(b) of the Justice Assistance Act of 1984; Pub. L. 98-473). The amendment provided in general terms that all criminal history record information -8 [Investigative and intelligence information is not covered. Wanted person information, original records of entry, court records or traffic offense records are specifically exempted from coverage of the Department of Justice regulations.] collected, maintained or disseminated by State and local criminal justice agencies with financial support made available under the Act must be kept complete and secure, must be made available for review and challenge by record subjects, and must be used only for law enforcement and other lawful purposes. In 1975, the U.S. Department of Justice's Law Enforcement Assistance Administration issued comprehensive information systems regulations to implement the amendment. These regulations, usually referred to as the Department of Justice (DOJ) regulations, are applicable to all State and local criminal justice agencies that have used funding for the support of criminal history record systems. The regulations impose minimum general requirements for criminal history information management, leaving the development of specific programs and procedures to State legislation and policymaking. As intended, the regulations have been instrumental in stimulating many States to enact their own laws to comply with the requirements of the Federal government. In addition, the regulations triggered a reassessment of existing State privacy and security laws that has gone beyond mere compliance, as evidenced by the fact that about half of the States have enacted comprehensive criminal history laws, some of which are in some respects stricter than the requirements of the regulations. Today, virtually all of the States have enacted legislation governing at least the dissemination of criminal history records. Although the approaches differ considerably, virtually all of the States have followed the lead of the regulations in distinguishing between information referring to convictions and current arrests, on the one hand, and nonconviction data on the other (information referring to cases without recorded dispositions or with dispositions favorable to the accused). Most States have placed stricter limits on the release of nonconviction data for noncriminal justice purposes, such as background screening for employment and licensing purposes. Virtually all of the States also have established procedures to permit record subjects to review their records and to institute procedures to correct inaccuracies. Finally, virtually all of the States have established security procedures complying generally with the requirements of the regulations. In these areas, as in other areas of record management, the regulations do not require the enactment of legislation, so long as adequate operational procedures are implemented by regulation, agency rule or other appropriate means. Thus, the numbers of State statutes in these areas cited in this volume do not fully reflect the significant progress made in these areas of privacy protection. Two areas of criminal history record information management merit special analysis. These areas are: (1) data quality and (2) dissemination of criminal records for noncriminal justice purposes. They are discussed in Section B. -------------------------------------------- B. Analysis of critical issues 1. Data quality -------------------------------------------- As noted earlier, the broad language of the 1973 Congressional amendment provided the basis for comprehensive regulations issued by LEAA in 1975 covering all State and local criminal history record systems supported in whole or in part by Federal funding. -9 ["Criminal Justice Information Systems Regulations," 28 C.F.R. Part 20.] Among other things, the regulations require all covered agencies to implement operational procedures designed to ensure that criminal history record information is complete and accurate. -10 [28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.21(a)(1993).] The regulations state that to be complete, a record of an arrest must contain information concerning any disposition occurring within the State within 90 days after the disposition has occurred. In order to promote the dissemination of complete criminal history records, the regulations require that State and local agencies establish procedures to query the State central repository prior to disseminating information unless the agency is assured that it is disseminating the most up-to-date disposition data or time is of the essence and the repository is technically incapable of responding within the necessary time period. -11 [28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.21(a)(1)(1993).] The provisions of the regulations dealing with accuracy define accuracy literally to mean that "no record containing criminal history record information shall contain erroneous information." -12 [28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.21(a)(2)(1993).] In order to promote accuracy, two types of operational procedures are required: (1) a process of data collection, entry, storage and systematic audit that will minimize the possibility of recording and storing inaccurate information; and (2) procedures for sending notices of corrections to all criminal justice agencies known to have received inaccurate information of a material nature. As a practical matter, this provision requires agencies to create and maintain dissemination logs so that corrections can be sent to recipients of erroneous information. Finally, the regulations require agencies to give criminal record subjects an opportunity, upon request, to review their criminal history record information for purposes of ensuring accuracy and completeness. -13 [28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.21(g)(1993).] -------------------------------------------- State statutory provisions -------------------------------------------- As noted earlier, the regulations do not require the States to enact legislation dealing with accuracy and completeness. Many States, however, have chosen to deal with the problem by State law. In 1974, just prior to publication of the regulations, only 14 States had adopted statutory data quality safeguards. By 1978, 2 years after the adoption of the LEAA regulations, 41 States had added data quality provisions of one kind or another to their criminal history record statutes. That number increased to 45 States in 1979, to 49 States in 1981, to 51 States in 1984, and to 52 States in 1991 through 1997. -14 [As used in the Compendium, the term "State" includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. All except the Virgin Islands have enacted data quality provisions.] Although the regulations do not expressly require that the States establish State central criminal record repositories, the Commentary published with the regulations noted that the provisions on accuracy and completeness were written with State central repositories in mind. Indeed, the provisions of the regulations dealing with completeness state that complete records "should" be maintained in State central repositories. -15 [28 C.F.R. ¤ 20.21(a)(1)(1993).] Today every State, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, have established State central repositories and most of them conform generally to the model described in the Commentary. In all of those States, pursuant to statute, regulation or established practice, criminal justice agencies throughout the State are required to report arrest and disposition data to the State repositories for all serious offenses (usually felonies and serious misdemeanors). All of the States have statutory provisions expressly requiring the reporting of arrest information. In most cases, arrest information is reported on arrest fingerprint cards, which include the subject's name and identification information, arrest event information (date, place, etc.), arrest charges and inked fingerprint impressions. All 52 of the jurisdictions with data quality provisions also have adopted legislation that imposes some form of disposition reporting requirement on some types of State and local agencies. -16 ["Disposition" is used here to mean post-arrest case processing information, including information relating to prosecution, court adjudication, sentencing and correctional status.] Many of these statutes (for example, Alaska, California, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri and Texas) are quite specific as to the types of data to be reported, the responsible agency or official, time requirements and sanctions. Others, however, merely state a general reporting requirement with little or no detail as to how or by whom reporting is to be accomplished, leaving these particulars to be spelled out in regulations. Even in those States with more detailed reporting laws, not all types of information are covered. Only 29 States specifically require the reporting of prosecutor information to the central repository -17 [Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.] and in only a few of these States are prosecutors required to report to the repository all of the charges that were filed, modified or dropped. Forty-five State statutes require the courts (customarily the court clerks) to report disposition information to the central repository. -18 [Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.] Forty-five States require correctional agencies to report correctional information, such as reception, release, parole, escape or death. -19 [Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.] Other problems with many of the disposition reporting laws include the failure of States to impose time limits for the reporting of disposition data and the lack of meaningful penalties for failure to comply. Only 29 States prescribe statutory time limits for the reporting of disposition data, -20 [Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.] and many of these apply only to certain types of data. Twenty-two States have adopted statutory provisions which expressly prescribe administrative, civil or criminal sanctions for violations of disposition reporting requirements, -21 [Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Utah, Vermont and West Virginia.] but research has failed to discover a single reported decision in which a criminal justice official has actually been penalized for failing to comply with disposition reporting requirements. -22 [See, SEARCH Group, Inc., Liability for Mishandling Criminal Records (Sacramento, California: SEARCH Group, Inc., April 1984). There are reported decisions, however, penalizing officers for failing to file other types of reports, and one decision penalizing an agency for failing to make a required entry in a dissemination log.] Statutes that impose transaction log requirements are the most common type of data quality provision other than disposition reporting. Thirty-three States have adopted statutory provisions that require criminal justice agencies to maintain logs identifying the recipients of criminal history record information and the dates of the disseminations. -23 [Twenty-two of the 33 States that maintain dissemination logs have specific and relatively detailed transaction log requirements. The States are: Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.] Statutes in 30 States require the central repositories to conduct some type of audit. -24 [Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming.] Auditing is generally viewed as one of the most effective data quality procedures. Statutes in 23 of these States require the central repository to conduct continuing or periodic audits of State and local agencies that submit records to the repository. -25 [Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming.] The scope of this kind of local agency audit usually includes: (1) adherence by the local agency to Federal and State regulations; (2) completeness and accuracy of criminal history record reporting; (3) adherence to dissemination standards; (4) implementation of appropriate security safeguards; and (5) compliance with mandated subject access and review provisions. Sixteen States require the repository to conduct an in-house audit of its own records, usually on an annual basis. -26 [Alaska, Arizona, California, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming. (Alaska requires in-house audits every 2 years. Arizona's law requires "periodic" in-house audits.)] In general, the scope of these audits parallels the scope of the audits of local agency systems. However, statutes in some of these States expressly require that the in-house audit also attempt to identify case cycles with dispositions which are likely to have occurred but which have not been reported. Statutes in 14 of the States require both an in-house repository audit and audits of contributing agencies. -27 [Alaska, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming.] Finally, statutory provisions adopted in a few States impose other kinds of data quality requirements. Statutes in 14 States require State and local criminal justice agencies to query the central repository prior to disseminating criminal history record information in order to assure that the most up-to-date disposition information is being used. -28 [Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Virginia and Washington.] Thirteen States have added provisions to their statutes that require the repository to implement some kind of delinquent disposition monitoring system (for example, a system designed to periodically identify arrest entries for which dispositions are probably available but not reported). -29 [Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Washington.] Five States have adopted statutory provisions that specifically impose training requirements on personnel involved in entering data into criminal history record systems. -30 [Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Kentucky and Louisiana.] Seven States have adopted statutory provisions that address the use of automated programs to provide systematic editing procedures for the purpose of detecting missing or nonconforming data. -31 [Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Nebraska, South Carolina and Virginia.] Of course, in almost every State the bulk of data quality requirements is expressed in regulations or administrative policies and procedures, rather than in legislation. However, the extent to which State legislation addresses data quality issues is a reflection of a State's concern about data quality. It is clear, however, that the enactment of legislation and the issuance of regulations are not enough to solve the problem of data quality. While 52 States have adopted at least some standards for accuracy and completeness that reflect standards in the DOJ regulations, there is little question that the quality of criminal history data in this Nation falls short of satisfactory. Disposition reporting - or the lack of reporting - remains the most serious deficiency, especially in terms of court disposition reporting. Next in importance is auditing. Numerous States have statutory provisions requiring ongoing systematic audits and annual in-house audits; in practice, however, many States have not made data quality auditing a priority sufficient to comply with existing standards. The issue is commitment: the States must be committed to put into place, and practice, procedures to collect and maintain complete and accurate data, and to scrupulously and regularly conduct systematic audits to ensure compliance with those procedures. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2. Access to criminal history records for noncriminal justice purposes Background ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Reversing a trend that began after issuance of the DOJ regulations, criminal history record information is increasingly becoming available outside of the criminal justice system. Even nonconviction information is now being made more available to noncriminal justice agencies. Twenty-nine States have adopted open record or freedom of information statutes that cover some types of criminal history record information. (See the Survey Comparison Table on page 15.) This does not mean that criminal history record information is publicly available in these States in all circumstances, but it does mean that some types of information are more available than before. As a part of this trend, a majority of the States now permit access to some criminal history records by at least some types of noncriminal justice agencies and private entities. For example, special access rights are increasingly accorded to governmental agencies with national security missions and to licensing boards and some governmental and private employers screening applicants for sensitive positions, such as those involving public safety, supervision of children or custody of valuable property. The Congressional efforts of the 1970s to enact Federal legislation setting nationwide dissemination standards for State criminal history record systems failed. In addition, the LEAA regulations on criminal history record systems issued in 1975 did not undertake to set a uniform policy on noncriminal justice access, but instead essentially left the matter up to the legislatures and governors of the individual States. Section 20.21(b)(2) of the regulations provides that noncriminal justice access and use is permitted if "authorized by statute, ordinance, executive order, or court rule, decision or order as construed by appropriate State or local officials or agencies." This approach, though laudable from the standpoint of States' rights, has resulted in a great diversity of statutory schemes in the States. It has also resulted in a steadily increasing volume of authorized noncriminal justice use. Findings of a national survey conducted in 1984 demonstrate that the State criminal record repositories were then handling over 2 million noncriminal justice access requests a year, -32 ["A Study to Identify Criminal Justice Information Law, Policy and Management Practices Needed to Accommodate Access to and Use of III for Noncriminal Justice Purposes," prepared for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Crime Information Center, by SEARCH Group, Inc., September 28, 1984, under Contract No. J-FBI-84-044.] and it is certain that the volume of such requests has increased significantly since then. In several States, including California, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and South Carolina, noncriminal justice traffic is greater than total criminal justice use of the criminal record systems, and, in several other States, noncriminal justice use is 40 percent or more of total system use. In many of these States, every session of the legislature in recent years has resulted in new statutory authority for noncriminal justice agencies and groups to obtain criminal record checks for such purposes as public and private employment, occupational licensing, and the issuance of various permits, certifications and clearances. As a result, it is probably safe to say that, in most States, present laws and policies on noncriminal justice access and use consist of a patchwork of statutory and regulatory provisions resulting from independent lobbying efforts by particular groups rather than from a comprehensive review of the issues and development of a consistent, balanced, statewide policy. It is literally true that no two State statutes on noncriminal justice access are identical. The following analysis of State statutory provisions confirms these observations. -------------------------------------------- State statutory provisions -------------------------------------------- State statutes governing dissemination of criminal history records for noncriminal justice purposes are so varied as to defy classification. A few States, including Michigan, Mississippi and New Jersey, have no statutory provisions setting statewide policies on noncriminal justice access; in these States, the DOJ regulations control access and use. In a few other States, including Maryland, New Hampshire, South Carolina and South Dakota, the statute does nothing more than delegate to a designated official the authority to issue rules and regulations on noncriminal justice dissemination. In States that do have laws dealing with the subject, the statutory approaches vary from those of Florida and Wisconsin, which are "open record" States where anyone can obtain access to criminal history records for any purpose, to that of Tennessee, which prohibits noncriminal justice access and use except for limited purposes specifically authorized by statute and makes it a criminal offense to release criminal history records for unauthorized purposes. The other States fall somewhere in between, with statutory approaches that differ greatly as to what types of noncriminal justice agencies may have access to particular types of records for particular purposes. There are, however, some patterns and similarities, due to the influence of the DOJ regulations. The regulations do not place any restrictions on the dissemination of conviction records or open arrest records (arrest records with no recorded disposition) less than one year old. Nonconviction records (favorable dispositions, including decisions not to refer or prosecute charges and indefinite postponements, and open arrest records over a year old and not actively pending) may be disseminated for any purpose authorized by statute, ordinance, executive order or court ruling. Most of the States have followed this approach of treating conviction records differently from nonconviction records. Commonly, the States place few or no restrictions on the dissemination of conviction records and a number of States also do not restrict the dissemination of open arrest records less than a year old. Nonconviction records are restricted to a greater degree and in some States may not be disseminated at all for noncriminal justice purposes or may be disseminated only for particular purposes under specified circumstances. Another similarity among many States is that the statutory provisions do not specifically identify particular noncriminal justice agencies or organizations that may obtain criminal history records. Instead, they define classes or types of agencies or organizations that may obtain certain types of records for specified purposes. Out-of-State or Federal agencies may be included, in addition to in-State, private and governmental agencies. The statutes may define permitted purposes in specific or more general terms. For example, some States authorize the use of criminal history records for any occupational licensing or employment purpose, while others authorize such use only for screening applicants for high-risk occupations, such as those involving the public safety, supervision of children, or custody of cash or valuable property or information. Many of the laws also require that certain agencies or organizations must be able to show specific legal authority under other statutory provisions to obtain criminal records or that the need for the record must be approved by a designated board, council or official. The statutory provisions that require separate legal authority for certain types of agencies vary considerably from State to State. The requirement may simply provide that the requestor must be "authorized by law" or must have "legal authority" or that the records must be necessary for a "lawful purpose." -33 [For example, Alaska, Delaware, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina and West Virginia.] Such provisions are interpreted in some States as authorizing the dissemination of criminal records for employment and occupational licensing purposes where the employing or licensing agencies are required by law to screen out applicants who are not of "good moral character." Other State criminal record statutes, however, authorize the release of records for noncriminal justice purposes only if the requesting agency is "expressly" authorized by some other provision of State or Federal law to obtain criminal records for use in the course of official duties. -34 [For example, Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Maine and Massachusetts.] This is a much stricter standard. Still stricter provisions authorize the release of criminal records only pursuant to statutory provisions that expressly refer to criminal conduct or to criminal records and contain requirements, exclusions or limitations based upon such conduct or records. -35 [For example, Connecticut, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Virginia.] Where prior approval by a council, board or designated official is required for the release of criminal records for noncriminal justice purposes, the designated standard for approval varies among the States. For example, criminal record laws in New Hampshire and South Dakota delegate general discretion to the director of the criminal history record repository to determine who may have access, while Massachusetts law provides that the Criminal History Systems Board must find that the public interest in releasing criminal records to particular noncriminal justice requesters outweighs the security and privacy interests of the record subject. Several States, including Alabama, Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio and South Dakota, require that the record subject must consent in writing to any release of his criminal history record for noncriminal justice purposes. -------------------------------------------- State dissemination policies -------------------------------------------- As evident from the discussion above, the criminal history record laws in many States provide only the framework for the State's policies on dissemination. Specific legal authority for particular agencies or organizations to obtain criminal records may be set out in separate statutory provisions, executive orders or even local ordinances. In addition, the actual policies and practices of particular States may be set out in regulations or may be based upon written or unwritten repository policies. These policies and practices often provide for more restrictive dissemination approaches than the criminal record laws require them to be. That is, usually due to lack of staff and facilities, many State repositories do not provide records to all of the noncriminal justice agencies and organizations that are authorized to obtain them under their laws. In addition, many States impose administrative requirements that may not be required specifically by their laws. For example, some States require that the subject's fingerprints be submitted with all requests for noncriminal justice access and that records may be released only when a fingerprint comparison positively verifies that the requested record relates to the subject of the request. All except a handful of the States charge fees ranging from $3.00 to $44.00 for processing record searches for noncriminal justice purposes. -36 [A survey conducted by SEARCH in 1991 revealed that all of the States charged fees except Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii, Mississippi and Vermont. Fee legislation is reportedly under consideration in some of these States.] -------------------------------------------- Interstate dissemination -------------------------------------------- Until recent years, the considerable disparity among State dissemination laws was not perceived as a serious obstacle to the interstate dissemination of criminal records for noncriminal justice purposes, such as employment and occupational licensing. This was due primarily to the fact that there was no effective system linking the State repositories together in such a way as to permit the efficient exchange of records from State to State for noncriminal justice purposes. National criminal record checks for noncriminal justice purposes have been feasible in the past only through use of the criminal files maintained in the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division (CJIS), which contain arrest and disposition information voluntarily submitted by criminal justice agencies throughout the country. Pursuant to Federal laws and regulations, searches of these files are conducted for Federal noncriminal justice agencies for such purposes as civilian employment, security clearances, military recruitment, alien registration, visas and other official purposes, and for Federal and State law enforcement agencies for criminal justice employment purposes. Searches also are conducted for State and local governmental employment and licensing agencies with approved legal authority to request such searches and for employment in federally chartered or insured banks and designated segments of the securities and commodities industries. Although the criminal files of the U.S. Department of Justice are made up primarily of arrest and disposition data submitted by State and local criminal justice agencies, these records are subject to Federal law and are disseminated by the FBI pursuant to Federal laws and regulations authorizing record checks for the agencies and organizations noted above. Under this program, inquiring Federal agencies are provided with all of the information the FBI possesses on subject individuals, including favorable dispositions and open arrest records without regard to the age of the record. Responses provided to banks, securities firms and State employment and licensing agencies include the subject's entire record with the exception of open arrests which are over a year old and not actively pending. Thus, because most States' dissemination laws are more restrictive than the Federal standard, it is possible for authorized Federal and State noncriminal justice agencies to legally obtain State-contributed records from the FBI for purposes for which they could not, in some cases, obtain the records directly from the States where the records originated. This system of duplicate State and Federal files is being phased out because of concern for the disparity among State security and confidentiality laws and the expense of maintaining and updating records at both the State and Federal levels. The system which is emerging replaces the "national repository" concept with a system based on a national index linking State repositories. This system is known as the Interstate Identification Index (usually referred to as "III" or "Triple I"). When the system is fully operational nationwide, the III index maintained at the national level will contain personal identification data on individuals whose criminal records are maintained in State criminal record repositories (State offenders) and in the criminal files of the FBI (Federal offenders) but it will not contain any charge or disposition information. The index will serve as a "pointer" to refer inquiring criminal justice agencies to the State or Federal files where the requested criminal history records are maintained. The records will be exchanged directly between the States and between State and Federal criminal justice agencies by means of telecommunications lines linking Federal, State and local criminal justice agencies throughout the country. Dissemination and use of the records obtained from State repositories will be governed by the laws and policies of the individual States, rather than by the uniform dissemination policy now used by the FBI. It should be apparent that the disparity and restrictiveness of State dissemination laws will present serious obstacles to implementation of this type of interstate system as a viable successor to the national search system previously maintained by the FBI. First, programming the index to screen noncriminal justice requests on the basis of the wide variety of existing State laws and policies would be difficult, and the inquiry procedures would be complex. Second, pursuant to present State dissemination laws, substantially fewer records would be available to noncriminal justice agencies under the index-pointer approach than are now legally available to them from the FBI's files. As pointed out earlier, this is because the dissemination laws of a majority of the States are considerably more restrictive than the FBI standard. Some States will provide no records to Federal or out-of-State agencies and others will provide only convictions (sometimes only certain convictions) and perhaps open arrest records that are less than a year old. It seems likely that this level of service would be viewed by these agencies (and by other policymakers) as insufficient to satisfy their needs. Conclusion The absence of Federal legislation or regulations establishing a uniform nationwide dissemination policy for State criminal record systems has permitted the States to develop and implement their own approaches to the release of criminal records for noncriminal justice purposes. This has had the laudable effect of leaving the States free to establish their own privacy and confidentiality laws and policies to strike a proper balance between the rights of record subjects and the public interest. However, this has also resulted in the evolution of widely varying State approaches, and in laws and policies in many States that are more restrictive than the Federal standard that governs noncriminal justice use of the FBI's files of State-contributed criminal history records. These factors are emerging as serious obstacles to the implementation of an "index-pointer" system for the interstate exchange of criminal records, such as the III system now being implemented. The ultimate success of this national program for the interstate exchange of criminal history records for noncriminal justice purposes will depend upon the willingness of many of the States to modify existing restrictions in their laws and policies in order to provide a comparable level of service to Federal agencies and other noncriminal justice agencies that are now authorized to obtain records from the FBI. A proposed interstate compact to implement the use of the III system for noncriminal justice purposes incorporates a noncriminal justice access and dissemination standard that is identical to the Federal standard now applicable to the FBI's Identification Division. Ratification of this compact by a State would have the effect of amending the State's criminal record dissemination law in the manner suggested above, so that the State could make available the level of record service necessary for effective operation of the III system. The compact has been approved by the FBI Director and the Attorney General and is expected to be submitted for Congressional review in 1998. After approval by the Congress, to endorse the participation of the FBI in the system, the compact will be submitted to the States for ratification. -------------------------------------------------- Section 2: Classification category definitions -------------------------------------------------- The following are definitions of the 28 subject/matter categories into which State laws and regulations have been classified for both the individual and summary State tables in this Compendium. 1. State regulatory authority. A grant of power to a State agency to promulgate statewide security and privacy regulations for criminal justice information systems. 2. Privacy and security council. A State board, committee, commission or council whose primary statutory function is monitoring, evaluating or supervising the confidentiality and security of criminal justice information. 3. Dissemination regulations. Restrictions on dissemination of criminal history information. 4. Inspection. The right of an individual to examine his or her criminal history record. 5. Right to challenge. The right to an administrative proceeding in which an individual may contest the accuracy or completeness of his or her criminal history record. 6. Judicial review of challenged information. The right of an individual to appeal to a State court an adverse agency decision concerning challenged information. 7. Purging nonconviction information. The destruction or return to the individual of criminal justice information where no conviction has resulted from the event triggering the collection of the information. 8. Purging conviction information. The destruction or return to an individual of criminal history information indicating a conviction. 9. Sealing nonconviction information. The removal of criminal history information from active files where no conviction has resulted from the event triggering the collection of the information. 10. Sealing conviction information. The removal from active files of individual criminal history information indicating a conviction. 11. Removal of disqualifications. The restoration of rights and privileges such as public employment to persons who have had criminal history records purged or sealed. 12. Right to state nonexistence of record. The right to indicate in response to public or private inquiries the absence of criminal history in cases of arrest not leading to conviction or where an arrest or conviction record has been purged. 13. Research access. The provision for and regulation of access to criminal justice information by outside researchers. 14. Accuracy and completeness. A requirement that agencies institute procedures to ensure reasonably complete and accurate criminal history information, including the setting of deadlines for the reporting of prosecutorial and court dispositions. 15. Dedication. The requirement that computer configurations be assigned exclusively to the criminal justice function. 16. Civil remedies. Statutory actions for damages or other relief resulting from violations of privacy and security laws. 17. Criminal penalties. Criminal sanctions for violations of privacy and security laws. 18. Public records. Requirements that official records maintained by public officials be open to the public. 19. Separation of files. Requirements that criminal history information be stored separate from investigative and intelligence information. 20. Regulation of intelligence collection. Restrictions on the kind of intelligence information which may be collected and retained and/or prohibition on its storage in computerized systems. 21. Regulation of intelligence dissemination. Restrictions on dissemination of intelligence information. 22. Security. Requirements that criminal justice agencies institute procedures to protect their information systems from unauthorized disclosure, sabotage and accidents. 23. Transaction logs. Records which must be maintained by criminal justice agencies indicating when and to whom criminal justice information is disseminated. 24. Training employees. Security and privacy instruction which must be provided to employees handling criminal justice information. 25. Listing of information systems. A mandatory disclosure of the existence of all criminal justice information systems describing the information contained in such systems. 26. Freedom of Information Act (including criminal justice information). Provisions for public access to government records that apply to criminal justice records. 27. Freedom of Information Act (excluding criminal justice information). Provisions for public access to government records from which criminal justice records are specifically excluded. 28. Central State repository. Establishment of a bureau, agency or other entity to collect and maintain criminal history records or criminal identification data for all criminal justice agencies in the State. ---------------------------------------------------------- Section 3: Summary tables of statutes and regulations by classification category Category '74 '78 '79 '81 '84 '87 '89 '92 '94 '97 1 State regulatory authority 7 38 42 46 48 48 48 48 48 48 2 Privacy and security council 2 10 13 22 27 26 25 23 23 23 3 Dissemination regulations 24 40 44 51 52 52 52 52 52 52 4 Inspection 12 40 43 42 53 53 52 52 51 51 5 Right to challenge 10 30 36 36 41 42 42 45 45 45 6 Judicial review of challenged information 10 20 22 17 20 21 22 24 24 24 7 Purging nonconviction information 20 23 28 35 38 38 38 39 39 40 8 Purging conviction information 7 13 19 24 26 27 27 27 27 26 9 Sealing nonconviction information 8 15 16 20 21 23 26 26 29 31 10 Sealing conviction information 7 20 21 22 25 25 26 27 29 30 11 Removal of disqualifications 6 22 22 27 27 24 24 24 24 23 12 Right to state nonexistence of record 6 13 17 22 24 25 26 28 31 33 13 Research access 6 12 14 21 27 28 29 29 32 33 14 Accuracy and completeness 14 41 45 49 51 51 51 52 52 52 15 Dedication 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 16 Civil remedies 6 22 25 33 36 37 38 36 36 36 17 Criminal penalties 18 35 39 39 43 44 45 45 44 44 18 Public records 9 43 42 53 53 53 53 52 52 52 19 Separation of files 5 10 10 6 7 10 10 11 13 14 20 Regulation of intelligence collection 3 10 10 12 16 18 20 20 21 21 21 Regulation of intelligence dissemination 7 24 25 18 25 23 23 24 25 26 22 Security 12 26 31 32 38 40 40 40 42 43 23 Transaction logs 6 11 27 28 30 34 35 33 35 35 24 Training employees 4 18 23 15 22 24 26 25 27 27 25 Listing of information systems 1 8 8 7 6 7 7 8 8 8 26 FOIA (including CJI) ** ** 18 27 28 29 30 29 26 25 27 FOIA (excluding CJI) ** ** 19 22 23 23 26 28 30 29 28 Central State repository ** ** ** 51 52 52 52 52 52 52 *The figures presented are cumulative and may include statutes or regulations previously enacted but excluded from prior surveys. **Data are unavailable for these years. ---------------------------------------------------------- A. Survey comparison of changes in State statutes and regulations by classification category The table on the following page graphically depicts comparative results of legislative survey findings for the years 1974, 1978, 1979, 1981, 1984, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1994 and 1997, which track changes in State security and privacy statutes and regulations by classification category. The reader should note, however, that each survey year is included in the results of the succeeding survey, with the cumulative sum of the legislative activity reflected in the current survey year. The table shows that the leveling trend detected in the 1984 survey has continued. Surveys through 1981 showed significant increases in the number of States enacting new laws or regulations in most categories. In recent years, however, State legislative activity dealing with criminal records has slowed. New or significantly amended provisions have been enacted by only a few States in a few categories. This probably reflects two developments. First, most of the States have now settled on the basic approach they favor concerning the regulation of the maintenance and use of criminal records, and recent legislation has dealt with refinements in existing laws rather than enactment of new initiatives. Second, the basic principles of security and privacy reflected in the Federal regulations have become widely recognized and understood by criminal justice officials, and procedures to prevent abuses have been established and enforced. As a result, security and privacy issues and concerns are not as prevalent as they were in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the States were beginning to wrestle with the problem of compliance with the regulations. As a result, the survey comparison table shows that, in many categories, the numbers for 1997 are the same as those for 1984 through 1994. In most of the others, the numbers reflect new enactments by only one or two States. [Page 15, the table Survey comparison of changes in State statutes and regulations by classification category, can be found in the Excel file, PAGE15.WK1.] ---------------------------------------------------- B. Summary of State statutes and regulations by classification category ---------------------------------------------------- The tables on the following pages, titled "Summary of State statutes and regulations by classification category," contain detailed matrixes summarizing State statutes and regulations through July 1997. For easy reference, the table for each classification category is organized alphabetically by State, and the matrix references are keyed to section numbers of the State codes. These summary tables, and all other tables in this Compendium, reflect the laws of 53 jurisdictions: the 50 States and the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The citations are to official compilations of State laws and regulations. Only title and section numbers are set out in these summary tables. For the full titles of the compilations to which the citations refer, please refer to Section 4, page 47. [Summary of State statutes and regulations by classification category Tables 1-28 found in Excel.wk1 format.] -------------------------------------------- Section 4: Summary tables of statutes and regulations by State -------------------------------------------- This section of the Compendium sets forth (1) a list of the full titles of the official compilations of each State's laws and regulations, (2) the full titles for each classification category and subcategory, and (3) the citations for that particular category or subcategory which indicate section numbers of the State codes. These summary tables listing State criminal history record privacy and security laws and regulations are set out in alphabetical order by State. The purpose of this collection is to make available to the researcher the variety of approaches and alternatives taken by the States with regard to their criminal history information practices. However, please note that this effort is current through July 1997; thus, further review of a particular State's legislation may be appropriate to include more recent enactments. Readers are reminded that the full text of the State laws cited herein is available for a small fee in microfiche form from the Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse. (The Clearinghouse also offers a hard copy version for a larger fee. See page vii for ordering information.) A full, hard-copy library of these laws, regulations and other materials is maintained by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, at its offices in Sacramento, California. Copies of specific enactments may be ordered by mail or telephone. (SEARCH is at 7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145, Sacramento, California 95831, 916/392-2550.) -------------------------------------------- State code titles -------------------------------------------- Alabama Code Alaska Statutes Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated Arkansas Statutes Annotated California (Codes listed on summary table) Colorado Revised Statutes Connecticut General Statutes Annotated (West) Delaware Code Annotated District of Columbia Code Florida Statutes Annotated Georgia Code of 1981 Hawaii Revised Statutes Idaho Code Illinois Compiled Statutes Indiana Code Annotated Iowa Code Annotated (West) Kansas Statutes Annotated Kentucky Revised Statutes Annotated (Baldwin) Louisiana Revised Statutes Annotated (West) Maine Revised Statutes Maryland Annotated Code of 1957 Massachusetts General Laws Annotated (West) Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated Minnesota Statutes Annotated Mississippi Code Annotated Missouri Annotated Statutes (Vernon) Montana Revised Codes Annotated Nebraska Revised Statutes Nevada Revised Statutes New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated New Jersey Statutes Annotated (West) New Mexico Statutes Annotated New York (Codes listed on summary table) North Carolina General Statutes North Dakota Century Code Ohio Revised Code Annotated (Page) Oklahoma Statutes Annotated (West) Oregon Revised Statutes Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes Annotated (Purdon) Puerto Rico Laws Annotated Rhode Island General Laws South Carolina Code South Dakota Compiled Laws Annotated Tennessee Code Annotated (Vernon) Texas Codes Annotated (Vernon) Utah Code Annotated Vermont Statutes Annotated Virgin Islands Code Annotated Virginia Code Washington Revised Code Annotated West Virginia Code Wisconsin Statutes Annotated (West) Wyoming Statutes ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary of State statutes and regulations by classification category 1. State regulatory authority AL 41-9-591, 594 AK 12.62.110(5), .120(a) AZ 41-1750; 41-2203.A.3 AR 12-12-201, 207, 211, 1003 CA Pen. Code 11077 CO 24-33.5-401; 24-72-301 CT 54-142j DE 11-8501, 8601, 8606 DC FL 943.05 GA 35-3-31, 32, 33 HI 846-2.5 ID 67-2910, 2911 IL 20-3930/4, 7 IN 5-2-5-10; 10-1-2.5-1 IA 232.45, 148; 690.1; 692.10 KS 22-4704 KY 17.147, .150(6) LA "15:579" ME 25-1541(4) MD 27-746 MA 6-168 MI 28.241 et seq. MN 299C.01, .03 MS 45-27-7(1)(a) MO 43.509, 515 MT 44-2-201; 44-5-105 NE 29-3516 NV 179A.080 NH 106-B:14 NJ 53:1-12 NM 29-3-1; 32A-15-4 NY Exec. Law 837(8), Subd. 8; Corr. Law 29(2); Pub. Off. Law 89(1)(b) NC 114-10.1, .5, 12, 19; 132-1.4 ND OH 109.57, 57.1 OK 74-150.4, Subd. 4.; 74-150.7, Subd. 2.; 74-150.7d OR 181.066, .511, .521, .540, .555, .560, .575; 181.730(3); Reg. Ch. 257, Div. 10 PA 18-9152, 9161 PR Act 1977 No. 129 Sect. 1; Act 4(c) RI SC 23-3-130 SD 23-5-5, 6; Reg. 2:02:01, 2:02:05 TN 38-6-101; 38-10-101 through 105 TX Gov't Code 411.081 UT 53-5-201 VT 20-2051 VI VA 9-170, 188 WA 10.97.090 WV 15-2-25 WI WY 7-19-105; 9-1-623 --------------- 2. Privacy and security council AL 41-9-594 AK 12.62.100 AZ 41-2203 AR 12-12-201, 202, 203 CA CO CT DE "11-8603" DC FL 943.06, .08; Reg. 11C-5 GA 35-3-32 HI 846-2.5 ID IL 20-3930/2, 7 IN 5-2-5-11 IA KS KY LA 15:578; Reg. LAC 1-18:1 ME MD 27-744 MA MI Regs.  28.5107 MN MS 45-27-7(1)(f) MO 43.515, 518 MT NE 29-3505 NV 179A.080 NH Reg. 7.C, D NJ NM NY Pub. Off. Law 89, Subd. (2)(a) NC ND OH OK 74-150.4 OR 181.540, .715; Regs.  257-10 PA PR Act 4(i); Act 8; Reg. 3 RI SC SD TN TX UT VT ----------------- 3. Dissemination regulations AL 26-1-4; 32-2-60, 61, 62; 41-9-621, 621(6), 639, 642; Reg. 003 AK 12.62.160(b)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (8), (9), (10) AZ 4-202.E; 8-105, 230.02; 28-414.E; 36-883.02; 41-1606.02, 1750.G, 1750.G.1, 1750.G.2, 1964, 2204.6 AR 12-12-211, 1008, 1009, 1010 CA Pen. Code. 291, 291.1, .5, 11105, 11105.03, .2, .3, .4, 13203, 13300; Lab. Code 432.7(f)(1); Step Foundation, Inc. v. Younger (App 1979); 157 Cal. Rptr. 117 CO 24-72-305 CT 29-16; 54-142k, 142n DE 3-10128(b); 11-1448A, 8513, 8514, 8516, 8561 DC 1-1521 et seq.; 4-133.1; 1 DCMR 1004.4, .5 FL 119.07; 943.053, .0575, .0585, .059; Reg. 11C-6, 7 GA 35-3-33, 34, 34(b), 35; Reg. 140-2-.01, .04, .04(1), .04(1)(b), .04(1)(b)(3), .04(1)(c), .04(1)(e), .04(1)(f), .04(1)(g), .04(2), .04(2)(b) HI 463-5 et seq.; 846-9 ID 67-2909, 2911; Id. APA 11.10.01.013, .014 IL 15-310/10b.1; 20-10/22; 20-415/8b.1; 20-2605/55a(22), (28); 20-2630/3, 3.1, 5, 7; 20-2635/1 et seq.; 40-5/2-156; 40-5/14-149; 40-5/15-187; 40-5/18-163; 225-10/4, 4.1, 4.2; 225-446/75, 80; 230-5/15, 15(3); 230-10/22; 625-5/6-106.1, 411 IN 5-2-5-4, 5; 10-1-1-21 IA 692.17, .2, .2(5); Regs. 661-11.12 KS 22-4704, 4707(b); Reg. 10-11-2, 10-12-1, 10-12-2 KY 17.150, .160, .165, .167; Reg. 502 KAR 30:060 LA 15:584, 587; 40:1300.41; 44:3; Reg. LAC 1-18:6, 6(3) ME 16-612(3), 612(3)(A), (B), 612(A), 613(1), 613(2), 615, 617 MD 27-749; Reg. 12.15.01.10, .11, .12, .13; Reg. 15.02.05; Fam. Law 5-560 through 5-568 MA 6-168, 172, 172B, 178A; 128A-9A; 234A-33; Reg. 803 CMR 3.02-3.06, 4.01, 4.01(3), 4.02, 5.00 et seq., 7.03, 7.03(1)(d) MI 15.231 et seq.; 28.243, 244; 380.123; Regs. 28.5201, 28.5210; Gov. Exec. Ord. 1990-10 MN 13.82; 13.82, Subd. 15; 299C.13; 364.04(1), (2), (3); Reg. 6 S.R. 269-272 MS 45-27-7(1)(d) MO 43.540; 610.100, .120; Reg. CSR 30-4.070, .370, .375 MT 44-5-214, 301, 301(1)(a), 301(1)(b), 302, 303 NE 29-210, 3520, 3523 NV 179A.075.4(a); 179A.100, .180 through .240 NH Gen. 106-B:14, 14a; Reg. 3.A.2, 3.B, 3.B.2, 3.B.3, 3.B.8 NJ 53:1-16, 17; NJAC 13:59-1.1 NM 14-2-1; 14-2A-1; 28-2-3; 29-3-2, 3; 29-10-4, 5, 6, 7; 32A-2-32; 32A-3B-22; 32A-15-3 NY Pub. Off. Law 87(2)(e); Corr. Law 29, 168-1(5); CPL 160.30, .50, .50(1)(c), .50(1)(d), .55(1)(c) .55(1)(d), 170.56(3), 330.20, 720.35(1), 730; Exec. Law 837 (8-a), (6), 837-c(c), 837(4); Arts & Cul. Affairs Law  61.11; Alco. & Bev. Contr NC 110-90.2; 114-10, 10.1, 19, 19.3, 19.4, 415.2; 115C-332; 131D-10.3A; 132-1.4; Reg. NCAC 4F.0401 thru .0403, .0405 thru .0408 ND 12-60-16.5, 16.6 OH 109.57(A), Rule 109:5-1-01 OK 51-24A.2, .8; 74-150.9, .9B, .9C OR 181.555(1), (2), 560(1), (1)(b) PA 18-9121(a), (b), 9124, 9125 PR Reg.  8(a), (c)(1); Act  4 RI "12-1-4" SC Gen. 23-3-130, 140; Reg. 73-23, 23E. SD 23-5-5, 6, 11, 12, 12.1; 23-6-9, 14; Reg. 2:02:02:03; 2:02:03:06 TN 4-36-202; 33-1-209; 10-7-504(a)(2); 33-1-209; 37-1-408; 38-6-106, 109; 39-17-1351; 40-15-106(b) TX Gov't Code 411.081 thru .128; Health & Saf. Code Ch. 250; TRCS Art. 6252-17a; Ops. Atty. Gen. (May 14, 1976) No. 127; Ops. Atty. Gen.(Sept. 24, 1976) No. 144 UT 53-5-214; 53A-3-410; 77-18-9 VT 16-214; 20-2053, 2060; 33-309; Reg. 4.10(i); 6.30(a), (b) VI VA 9-187; 19.2-389, 389.1; 22.1-296.2; 63.1-198.1; Reg. 2.3 WA 10.97.030(2), .050(1) through (6); 10.98.150; 28A.400.303-306; 43.43.815, .830 through .845; 46 WV 15-2-24(c), (d), (e) WI 19.35(1); 165.82, .83 WY 7-19-106(a); 9-1-627 ------------------------- 4. Inspection AL 32-2-60 through 32-2-62; 41-9-621, 643 AK 12.62.160(b)(11) AZ 41-1750.G.5; Reg. 13-1-08 AR 12-12-211 CA Pen. Code 11122, 11124, 13323 CO 24-72-301, 303, 306 CT 54-142k DE "11-8513" DC 1-1522; 4-135; 1 DCMR 1004.1 et seq. FL 943.056; Reg. 11C-8; GA 35-3-37, 37(b); Reg. 140-2-.10 HI 92E-7; 846-14 ID 9-338, 342; 69-2911 IL 20-2630/7 IN 5-2-5-8 IA 692.5; Regs. 661-11.4, .5, .15 KS 22-4709, 4711; Reg. 10-13-2 KY 17.150; 61-874, 884; Reg. 502 KAR 30:070 LA 15:588; Reg. LAC 1-18:3(9) ME 16-620(1) MD 27-751; Reg. 12.15.01.05 MA 6-175; Reg. 803 CMR 6.02, .05, .05(5), .06 MI 15.233, .235 MN 13.03(3); 13.04, Subd. 3 MS 45-27-11 MO Reg. CSR 30-4.070 MT 44-5-214 NE 29-3520, 3525 NV 179A.150 NH Reg. 3.B.9 NJ NM 14-2-1 et seq.; 14-2A-1; 29-10-6, 8; 32A-2-26, 32; 32A-3B-22 NY CPL160.50 (1)(d), .55 (1)(d); Reg. 9 NYCRR 6050.1 NC Reg. NCAC 4F.0404 ND 12-60-16.3 and Administrative Rules OH OK 51.24A.5 OR 181.540(1)(b) PA 18-9151, 9152; Reg. 195.4 PR Act 4(m); Reg. 9(a) RI 38-2-3 SC Reg. 73-25 SD 1-11-13; 23-5-12, 13; 23-6-9, 11, 14; Reg. 2:02:03:01, 06 TN 10-7-506, 507; 40-15-106; 40-32-101; 40-35-313; Regs. 1395-1-.08(1)(k) TX Govt Code  552.023; TRCS Art. 6252-17a; Reg. 37 TAC 27.1 UT 53-5-214(7); 63-2-85.4(5) VT Reg. 8.10, 8.20 VI T.3-881(b) VA 9-192, 193; 19.2-389; Reg. 2.3, 2.4 WA 10.97.080; 43.43.730; Reg. WAC 446-20-090 WV 29B-1-3 WI 19.35(1) WY 7-19-109 ----------------------------- 5. Right to challenge AL 41-9-645 AK 12.62.170(b) AZ 41-2203.A.5; Reg. 13-1-08.D AR 12-12-211, 1013 CA Pen. Code 11126, 13324 CO 24-72-307 CT 54-142l DE 11-1448A, 8506(e), 8560 DC FL 943.056; Reg. 11C-8 GA 35-3-37(b); Reg. 140-2-.10 HI 92E-11; 846-14 ID 9-342, 343 IL 20-2630/7; 20-3930/7(h) IN 5-2-5-8(b), 10(b) IA 692.5; Regs. 661-11.4 KS 22-4709, 4711 KY Reg. 502 KAR 30:070 LA 15:588; Reg. LAC 1-18:4 ME 16-620(2), (3) MD 27-752; Reg. 12.15.01.05, .06, .07 MA 6-175; Reg. 803 CMR 6.07, 6.08 MI Regs.  28.5210 MN 13.04, Subd. 4 MS 45-27-11 MO Reg. CSR 30-4.070 MT 44-5-215 NE 29-3525, 3526 NV 179A.150 NH Reg. 7 NJ NJAC 13:59-1.6(b) NM 29-10-8 NY Reg. 9 NYCRR 6050.2 NC Reg. NCAC 4F.0404 ND 12-60-16.3 and Administrative Rules OH OK OR 181.540(1)(b) PA 18-9151, 9152; Reg. 195.5 PR Act 4(o); Act 15; Reg. 9(b) RI SC Reg. 73-25 SD Reg. 2:02:03:02, 05 TN TX Reg. 37 TAC 27.1 UT 53-5-214(7)(b); 63-2-85.4(6) VT Reg. 8.30 --------------------------------- 6. Judicial review of challenged information AL 41-9-645 AK 12.62.170(c) AZ AR CA Pen. Code 11126 CO 24-72-307 CT DE 11-1448A DC FL GA 35-3-37(c); Reg. 140-2-.10 HI "92E-11" ID 9-342 IL IN IA 692.5; Regs. 661.11.6 KS KY 17.150(5); Reg. 502 KAR 30:070, Sec. (6) LA Reg. LAC 1-18:4(14) ME 16-620(4) MD 27-753(c); Reg. 12.15.01.05, .07 MA 6-176 MI MN 13.04, Subd. 4; 14-63 et seq. MS 45-27-11 MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM 29-10-8 NY NC ND OH OK OR Reg. 257-10-035(5) PA 18-9152(e) PR Act 16 RI SC SD Reg. 2:02:05:01 TN TX UT VT VI VA 9-192 WA 43.43.730 WV WI WY 7-19-109 ------------------------------- 7. Purging nonconviction information AL 41-9-625 AK 12.62.190 AZ AR CA Pen. Code 851.8; H. & S. Code 11361.5 CO CT 54-142a DE 11-8506(c) DC FL 943.0585; Reg. 11C-7 GA 35-3-37(c) HI 831-3.2; 853-1(e) ID 67-2912 IL 20-2605/55(a); 20-2630/5 IN 35-38-5-1 IA 692.16, .17 KS KY LA 15:586; 44:9 ME MD 27-736, 737 MA 6-175; Reg. 803 CMR 6.07(3) MI 28.243 MN 152.18; 299C.11 MS 45-27-9(2), (4) MO 610.123, 124, 125, 126 MT 44-5-202(8), 212 NE NV 179A.075.3c; 179A.160 NH Reg. 3.D NJ NM 30-31-28; 32A-2-26; 32A-3B-21, 26; 32A-20-1 NY CPL 160.50; Family Court Act  354.1 NC 15A-146; Reg. NCAC 4F.0501, .0502 ND OH 109.60; 2951.04.1 OK 22-18, 19, 305.4, 991C OR 137.225 PA 18-9122 PR RI "12-1-12" SC 17-1-40; Reg. 73-27 SD 23-6-8.1; Reg. 2:02:03:02, 05 TN 40-15-106; 40-32-101 TX Code Crim. Proc. Art. 55.01 UT 53-5-214(4); 77-18-9 VT Reg. 10.10 ----------------------- 8. Purging conviction information AL AK 12.62.190 AZ 8-247 AR CA Pen. Code 1203.45; H. & S. Code 11361.5 CO CT 54-142a DE 11-8506(c) DC FL 943.0585; Reg. 11C7 GA 35-3-37(c) HI ID IL IN IA 907.9 KS KY LA ME MD MA 6-175; Reg. 803 CMR 6.07(3) MI MN 152.18; 364.04 MS 45-27-9(10), 11 MO MT 44-5-202(8), 212 NE NV 179A.160 NH Reg. 3.D NJ NM NY CPL 160.55; Family Court Act  354.1 NC 15A-145; 90-96; Reg. NCAC 4F.0501, .0502 ND OH OK 22-991C; 63-2-410 OR 137.225 PA 18-9122 PR Act 8 RI SC 22-5-910; 56-5-750(G); Reg. 73-27 SD 23-6-8.1; Reg. 2:02:03:02, 05 TN TX UT 77-18-9 VT Reg. 10.10 VI VA WA 9.94A.230; 10.97.060 WV WI WY 7-13-301; 35-7-1037 ---------------------------- 9. Sealing nonconviction information AL AK 12.62.180(b) AZ 13-4051 AR 16-90-904, 905 CA Pen. Code 851.8, .85 CO 24-72-308 CT 29-16; 54-142a DE "11-4372" DC SCR-Crim. 118 FL 943.059; Reg. 11C-7 GA 42-8-62 HI 831-3.2 ID IL 20-2630/5 IN 35-38-5-1 IA KS KY 17.142 LA "44:9" ME MD MA 276-100A, B, C; Reg. 803 CMR 7.02 MI 333.7411; 750.350a(4); 762.14; 769.4a MN 152.18; 299C.11 MS MO 610.100, 105, 120 MT 44-5-202(8) NE NV 179.255, .275 NH NJ 2C:36A-1, :52-6 NM 30-31-28; 32A-2-26 NY CPL 160.50(1)(c), 170.56, 720.15 NC ND OH OK 22-18, 19, 991c; 63-2-410 OR 137.225(1)(b) PA PR RI 12-1-12.1 SC SD TN TX UT 77-18-9 VT Reg. 10.10 VI VA 9-190; 19.2-392.2; Reg. 2.6 WA 13.50.050 WV WI WY -------------------------------- 10. Sealing conviction information AL AK 12.62.180(b) AZ 13-907 AR 16-90-904, 905 CA Pen. Code 1203.45 CO 24-72-308 CT 54-142a, 142b DE DC 33-541(e); SCR-Crim. 118, Crim. 32(g) FL 943.059; Reg. 11C-7 GA HI 712-1256; 831-3.1 ID IL IN 35-38-5-5 IA 907.9 KS 12.4516; 21-4619 KY LA "44:9" ME MD MA 94C-34; 127-152; 276-100A, B, C; Reg. 803 CMR 7.02 MI 712A.18e; 780.623 MN 242.31; 364.04; 609.166 through 168; 638.02, Subd. 3-5 MS MO 610.106, 120 MT 46-18-204 NE NV 179.245, .275; 453.336 NH 318-B:28-a ; 651:5 NJ 2C:52-2, 3, 4, 5 NM NY CPL 160.55(1)(c); CPL 720.15 NC ND OH 2953.32 OK 22-18, 19, 991c; 63-2-410 OR 137.225(1)(a) PA PR RI 12-1.3-2 SC SD 23A-27-14, 17 TN TX UT 77-18-9 VT Reg. 10.10 VI VA WA 13.50.050 WV WI WY ------------------------- 11. Removal of disqualifications AL AK AZ 13-905 through 912 AR CA Pen. Code 851.8, 1203.4, .4a, .45 CO 24-72-308 CT DE DC FL 943.0585 GA 42-9-1 et seq. HI 712-1255; 853-1 ID 18-3316 IL IN IA KS 12-4516(e); 21-4619; 22-3722 KY LA "44:9" ME MD 27-641; 27-735 through 741 MA 276-100A, C MI MN 152.18; 242.31; 364.03 MS MO MT NE NV NH 27.1284722222222 NJ 2C:52-27 NM 30-31-28; 32A-2-26; 32A-3B-21 NY CPL 720.35(1) NC ND OH 2951.04.1; 2953.33A OK 22-18, 19; 63-2-410 OR 137.225 PA PR RI 12-1.3-4 SC SD 23A-27-14, 17 TN 40-35-313(b) TX UT VT VI VA WA WV WI WY ---------------------- 12. Right to state nonexistence of record AL AK 12.62.180(d) AZ AR 16-90-902 CA Pen. Code 851.8, 1203.45; Lab. Code 432.7 CO 24-72-308 CT 54-142a DE DC 33.541(e) FL 943.0585 GA HI 712-1256; 831-3.2(b)(e) ID IL 20-2630/7 IN IA KS 12-4516(e) KY LA ME 16-618 MD 27-641, 739, 740 MA 94C-34; 127-152; 151B-4(a); 276-100A, C MI 37.2205a MN 152.18, Subd. 2 MS MO 610.11 MT NE NV 179.285 NH 27.1284722222222 NJ 2C:52-27 NM 30-31-28; 32A-2-26; 32A-3B-21 NY CPL 160.30, .60, 170.56(4) NC 15A-145, 146; 90-96 ND OH 2953.33(B) OK 22-18, 19; 63-2-410 OR 137.225(3) PA PR RI 12-1.3-4 SC SD 23A-27-14, 17 (Exceptions: 23A-27-14.1, 23-3-42) TN 40-35-313(b) TX Code Crim. Proc. Art. 55.03 UT 77-18-9 VT Reg. 6.20 VI VA 19.2-392.4 WA 10.97.030(8) WV WI WY --------------------------------- 13. Research access AL Reg. 003 AK 12.62.160(b)(7) AZ AR 12-12-1010 CA Pen. Code 13202 CO CT 54-142m DE 11-8513, 8514, 8516, 8521 DC FL 943.057; Reg. 11C-6 GA 33-3-38(8); Reg. 140-2-.04(1)(f) HI 846-9(4) ID IL IN IA 692.4, .7(1) KS KY 17.15 LA ME 16-613(4) MD 27-749; Reg. 12.15.01.12 MA 6-173; Reg. 803 CMR 8.00-8.03; 703(1)(b) MI MN 13.03 MS MO MT 44-5-304 NE NV 179A.075.2a, .6; 179A.100.5a NH Reg. 3.B.7 NJ NJAC 13:59-1.6(e) NM 29-10-6(B) NY Exec. Law  837(4) NC Reg. NCAC 4F.0407, .0408 ND 12-60-16.3 and Administrative Rules OH OK OR Reg. 257-10-030 PA PR Reg. 8(c)(3) RI SC Reg. 73-24D. SD 23A-27-13.1, 16 TN TX UT 53-5-214(2) VT Reg. 8.90 VI VA 19.2-389 WA 10.97.050(6); Reg. WAC 446-20, 190, 420 WV WI 19.35(1) WY 7-19-106(a)(r) --------------------------- 14. Accuracy and completeness AL 41-9-622, 648 AK 12.62.120, .150(a)(1), (a)(7), (a)(12), (c), .170(a) AZ 41-1751; 41-2205.A, B; Reg. 13-1-02, 04; Reg. 13-1-08E.-G AR 12-12-209, 210, 1004, 1007, 1013, 1015 CA Pen. Code 11079, 11107, 11115, 13100, 13125, 13127, 13150, 13151, 13152; Reg. 702(c), 707(c) CO 24-32-412(3); 24-72-307 CT 29-11, 12, 13; 54-142h(a), (b), (c); 54-142j DE 11-8506, 8506(f), 8507, 8508, 8509, 8510, 8511, 8512, 8525, 8607 DC 4-131, 132, 134 FL 943.052, .055, .056; Reg. 11C-4 GA 17-4-27; 35-3-33(4), 36, 36(k), 37(c); 42-8-62; Reg. 140-2-.03, .07; 1975 Atty. Gen. Op. No. 75-110 HI 846-3, 4, 5, 6, 13 ID 67-2911, 2912 IL 20-2630/2.1; 20-2635/21; 20-3930/7(i) IN 4-1-6-2, 5; 5-2-5-3; 5-2-5-10, 10(a)(l); 10-1-1-15, 18; 10-1-2.5-4 IA 690.4; 692.5, .13, .15, .19(6), .21; Regs. 661-11.9, .10 KS 21-2501; 22-4705(a), 4706(f); Reg. 10-10-1, 2, 3, 4 KY 17.110, .150(1), .150(1)(c), .150(6), .152, .1521, .1522 LA 15:579, 580, 581, 591, 594; Reg. LAC 1-18:2, 5, 7 ME 25-1542A, 1544, 1547; 16-612(3)(B), 616 MD 27-746(5), 747, 748, 748(6); Court Rule 1218; Reg. 12.15.01.08, .09, .16 MA 6-171, 175; 66A-2; 127-23, 27; 263-1A; Reg. 803 CMR 6.07, 6.08, 6.10 MI 28.243, .245a; 712A.11, .18; 764.29; 769.1, .16a; Regs.  28.5401 MN 299C.06, .10 through .14, .17; 299C.09, .10, .10(2), (3); Reg. 6 S.R. 273-276 MS 45-27-7(2)(c), 9 MO 43.503; Reg. CSR 30-4.040, .050, .090 MT 44-2-206; 44-5-202, 213, 213(5), (6); 44-5-215 NE 29-209, 3515, 3516, 3517, 3526 NV 179A.075.3, .080.3, .090, .150 NH 106-B:14, 14a; Reg. 4, 5 NJ 53:1-13, 14, 15, 18, 20.1, 20.2 NM 29-3-1, 3, 8 NY CPL 160.20, .30; Exec. Law  837(4), 837-a, b, c; Family Court Act  306.1(4), 354.1 NC 15A-502, 1382; Reg. NCAC 4F.0201, .0202, .0302, .0800 ND 12-60-16.2, 16.3 and Administrative Rules OH 109.57(A), .61, .62; 1347.05 OK 74-150.10, .12 OR 181.511, .511(1)(b), (c), .521, .530, .555(3) PA 18-9111, 9112, 9113, 9114, 9141, 9142, 9161; 61-2173, 2174; Reg. 195.2 PR Act 1, 8, 12(d); Reg. 6, 7, 10 RI 12-1-7, 8, 9, 10, 11 SC 14-17-325; 20-7-780; 23-1-90; 23-3-40, 120, 130; Reg. 73-21, 22, 22E., 28 SD 23-5-4, 8; 23-6-16; Reg. 2:02:02:01, 03, 04, 05; Reg. 2:02:04:01 TN 38-6-103; 38-10-101 through 105 TX Code of Crim. Proc., Ch. 60 UT 53-5-208, 209 VT 20-2053(b), 2054; Reg. 3.20, 4.10, 6.30(1), 6.30(b)(5), 11.10-11.40 VI VA 9-186, 191; 16.1-299, 299.1, 301; 19.2-389D, 390; Reg. 2.2., 2.2(3), 2.7 WA 10.97.040, .045, .090(3); 10.98.050, .090, .100; Reg. WAC 446-20-260, 310 WV 15-2-24(f), (g) WI 165.83, .84 WY 7-19-104, 105, 107, 107h, 108; 9-1-625 -------------------------- 15. Dedication AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA 35-3-33(13) HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA PR RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VI VA WA WV WI WY -------------------------- 16. Civil remedies AL AK 12.62.200 AZ 39-121.02; Reg. 13-1-05C AR CA Civ. Code 1798.53; Lab. Code 432.7 CO 24-72-305; 30-10-101 CT 4-197 DE 11-1448A, 8514, 8523; 29-10005 DC 1-1527 FL 119.02 GA 35-3-39 HI ID IL 20-2635/1 et seq. IN IA 692.2(3), .6 KS 22-4707 KY 17.157; 61.882 LA "15:596" ME 25-1550 MD 27-753; Reg. 12.15.01.10 MA 6-168, 177; Reg. 803 CMR 5.06, 6.08(4) MI MN 13.08; 299C.21 MS MO MT 44-2-205; 44-5-112 NE 29-3528; 84-712.03, .07 NV 179A.230 NH NJ 47:1A-4; 53:1-20 NM 14-2-12 NY Exec. Law 837-b(3).; Corr. Law 755 NC Reg. NCAC 4G.0201 ND OH 149.99; 1347.10 OK OR 192.49 PA 18-9181, 9183 PR RI 12-1-12; 12-1.3-4 SC 23-1-90; 30-4-100 SD Reg. 2:02:04:03 TN TX UT 63-2-88 VT 1-319, 320; Reg. 7.50, 13.10-13.22 VI VA 2.1-346.1; 9-194 WA 10.97.050(8), .110; 42.17.390; 43.43.834(7); Reg. WAC 44 WV WI 19.37 WY --------------------------------- 17. Criminal penalties AL 32-2-63; 36-12-42; 41-9-600 AK AZ 41-1750Y AR 12-12-212, 1002 CA Pen. Code 502, 11125, 11141, 11142, 11143, 13302, 13303, 13304; Lab. Code 432.7; Gov. Code 6200, 6201 CO 24-72-309 CT 29-17; 54-142k(e) DE 11-1448A, 8514, 8523, 8562 DC FL 119.02, .10 GA 35-3-38 HI 846-16 ID IL 20-2630/7; 20-2635/1 et seq. IN 5-2-4-7; 5-2-5-5(b) IA 692.5, .7 KS 22-4707, 4710 KY 17.157 LA 15:596; 44:9D; Reg. LAC 1-18:1 ME 16-619 MD 27-739; State Gov't Code  10-627 MA 6-178 MI 28.243a, .246 MN 13.09; 364.10 MS 25-53-59; 45-27-13 MO 109.180; 610.115 MT NE 29-3527 NV 179A.240, .300; 239.010 NH 106-B:14; 651:5.X NJ 2C:52-30; 53:1-20 NM 32A-2-32; 32A-3B-22 NY NC 14-454 ND 12-60-16.10 OH 1347.99; 2953.35 OK 21-461; 841.4 OR PA 61-2176 PR Act 20 RI SC 23-1-90; 30-4-100 SD 23-5-4; 23-6-4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16 TN 10-7-505; 37-1-409(b), (c); 40-15-106(c); 40-32-101(c); 62-26-230 TX Gov't Code 411.085 UT 53-5-214(9); 77-18-9 VT 20-2054(b) VI VA 9-195; 19.2-392.4.C; 52-8.3 WA 10.97.120; 43.43.810, .856 WV 15-2-24(j); 29B-1-5 WI 946.72(1) WY ----------------------------------- 18. Public records AL 36-12-40 AK 09.25.110, .120 AZ 39-121.01 AR 25-19-103, 1005 CA Gov. Code 6251 et seq. CO 24-72-301, 303; 30-10-101 CT 1-15, 19 DE 29-6412 DC 1-1521 et seq. FL 119.01 GA 50-18-70 et seq. HI 92-50 ID 9-335 et seq. IL 5-160/1 et seq.; 20-2635/1 et seq. IN 4-1-6-1; 5-14-3-1 IA 22.7(a); 692.2; Regs. 661-11.12 KS 45-215 et seq. KY 61.870 et seq. LA 44:1 et seq. ME 1-401-410 MD State Gov't Code  10-611 et seq. MA 4-7, cl. 26; 6-172; 66-10; 66A-1 et seq. MI 750.492 MN 13.01 et seq.; 13.87 MS 25-53-53; 25-59-19 MO 109.180, .190 MT 2-6-101 NE 29-3520; 84-712 et seq. NV 179A.100; 239.010 et seq. NH 7-A:1; 91-A:4 NJ 47:1A-1 NM 14-3-1 et seq. NY Pub. Off. Law 87 et seq. NC 132-1 et seq. ND 44-04-18 OH 149.43 et seq. OK 51-24A OR 181.54 PA 65-66.1 et seq. PR 32-1781 RI 38-2-1 et seq. SC 30-4-10 et seq. SD 1-27-1 et seq. TN 10-7-504 et seq. TX TRCS Art. 6252-17a, et seq. UT 63-2-59 et seq.; 78-26-1 et seq. VT 1-315 et seq. VI T.3-881 VA 42.1-76 et seq. WA 10.97.030; 42.17.250 WV 29B-1-1 WI 19.35(1) WY 16-4-201 through 205 --------------------------------- 19. Separation of files AL AK AZ AR 16-90-904 CA CO CT DE DC FL GA 35-3-32; Reg. 140-2-.02 HI ID IL IN 5-2-4-2 IA KS KY LA Reg. LAC 1-18:9(3) ME MD MA MI 15.232; 28.272 MN 260.161(3)(a) MS MO 610.12 MT NE NV 62.350.3 NH NJ NM 32A-20-1 NY Family Court Act 306.1(4); Exec. Law NC ND OH OK OR PA 18-9106 PR RI SC SD TN 37-10-207; Regs.  1395-1-1-.09(4) TX UT VT VI VA WA WV WI 48.396 WY ---------------------------- 20. Regulation of intelligence collection AL 41-9-639 AK AZ AR CA Civ. Code 1798.14, .15 CO CT DE DC FL 943.08 GA 35-3-32(2); Reg. 140-2-.02 HI ID IL IN 5-2-4-3, 4 IA 692.8, .9 KS KY 17.150(2) LA ME MD MA MI MN 13.05, Subd. 4; Reg. 6 S.R. 274 MS 25-53-53, 55 MO MT 44-5-501 through 515 NE NV 179A.070.2 NH NJ 53:6-4, 5 NM 29-3-1 et seq.; 32A-20-1 NY NC ND OH OK OR 181.575 PA 18-9106 PR RI SC SD 23-5-10, 11 TN TX UT 53-5-203 VT 20-1954 VI VA WA 43.43.854 WV WI WY 9-1-627 ---------------------------- 21. Regulation of intelligence dissemination AL 41-9-641 AK AZ AR CA Civ. Code 1798.18, .24 CO 24-72-305(5) CT DE DC FL 119.07, .072; 943.08 GA 35-3-32(4); Reg. 140-2-.02 HI 92E-3(1)(B) ID IL IN 5-2-4-6 IA 692.8, .9 KS KY LA Reg. LAC 1-18:9(4) ME 16-611(8), 614 MD MA MI 15.243; Regs.  28.5201 MN 13.05, Subd. 4; Reg. 6 S.R. 271 MS 25-53-53, 55 MO 610.1 MT 44-5-103(3)(b), 303, 404(2), 501 through 515 NE NV 179A.120.2, .150.1 NH NJ 53:6-5 NM 29-3-1 et seq.; 32A-15-4 NY Pub. Off. Law 87(2)(e) NC ND OH OK OR PA 18-9106, 9121(d) PR RI SC SD 23-5-11 TN 10-7-504; 40-15-106(b), (c)(1), 32-101(b), (c)(1) TX UT 53-5-203, 211, 214 VT 20-1955 VI VA WA 42.17.310; 43.43.854, .856 WV WI WY 9-1-627 ---------------------------- 22. Security AL 41-9-594, 621(9); Reg. 004, 005 AK 12.62.150(a)(3), (4), (5), (6) AZ 13-2316 AR 12-12-1014 CA Pen. Code 11077(a); Reg. 707, 707(a), 708 CO CT 54-142i DE 11-8505, 8521, 8605, 8608 DC FL 119.031; 943.08 GA 16-9-90 et seq.; 35-3-33(13); Reg. 140-2-.02, .08, .09, .11 HI 846-7 ID Id. APA 11.10.01.024 IL 20-2635/21 IN 4-1-6-2; 5-2-5-10(2); 5-14-3-7 IA 692.12, .14, .19(8) KS 22-4704; Reg. 10-11-1 KY LA 15:589; Reg. LAC 1-18:8 ME 16.614(1)(F); 25-1541(4), 2904 MD Reg. 12.15.01.15 MA 6-171, 174; 66A-2; Reg. 803 CMR 7.06 MI Regs.  28.5318 MN 13.05, Subd. 5; 299C.48(a) MS 45-27-7(1)(f) MO Reg. CSR 30-4.090 MT 44-5-401 through 405 NE 29-3518, 3519 NV 179A.080.1, .2 NH Reg. 1, 2 NJ NJAC 13:59-1.8(E); S.O.P. B-33, B-34, B-35 NM NY Exec. Law 837 (amended); Pub. Off. Law  87, 87(2)(i) NC 114-10(2); Reg. NCAC 4F.0101 ND 12-60-16.3 and Administrative Rules OH 1347.05 OK 51-24A.1 et seq. OR Reg. 257-10-025 PA 18-9131; Gen. Reg. 195.6 PR Act 8; Reg. 14, 16, 17 RI SC Reg. 73-21A.(3), 73-26 SD TN 39-14-601 et seq. TX UT 53-5-214(3)(6); 76-6-702, 703 VT Reg. 6.70, 7.10 - 7.40 VI VA 9-191; Reg. 3.1, 3.5, 3.6 WA 10.97.090; Reg. WAC 446-20 through 230, 270, 300 WV WI WY 7-19-105; 9-1-627 ----------------------------- 23. Transaction logs AL 41-9-640 AK 12.62.150(a)(7)(B), .160(c)(4) AZ AR 12-12-1008 CA Pen. Code 11078; Reg. 707(c) CO CT 54-142h(c) DE 11-1448A, 8513(3); Reg. 1.5 DC FL 943.055 GA 35-3-33(2); Reg. 140-2-.06 HI 846-6 ID Id. APA 11.10.01.023 IL IN 4-1-6-2 IA KS Reg. 10-14-1 KY LA Reg. LAC 1-18:6(6), 9(2C) ME 16-620(5) MD Reg. 12.15.01.10 through .12 MA 6-172 MI Regs.  28.5105 MN MS 45-27-7(2)(b) MO MT 44-5-215, 305, 404(3) NE 29-3517 NV 179A.130 NH Reg. 3.C.4 NJ NM NY NC Reg. NCAC 4F.0401, .0402 ND 12-60-16.3 and Administrative Rules OH OK 51-24A.1 et seq. OR Reg. 257-10-035 PA 18-9121(f) PR Reg. 9(e)(f), 10 RI SC Reg. 73-23F. SD Reg. 2:02:02:05 TN TX UT 53-5-203(3) VT Reg. 6.50, 14.10-14.30 VI VA 9-192; Reg. 2.3(5), 3.6 WA 10.97.050(7) WV WI WY 7-19-106(h) --------------------------------- 24. Training employees AL AK 12.62.150(a)(5) AZ AR 12-12-210, 211 CA Pen. Code 11077(d) CO CT 54-142i(d) DE 11-1448A, 8505, 8561 DC FL 943.08 GA 35-3-33(6); Reg. 140-2-.09(4) HI 846-7(5) ID 67-2911 IL IN 4-1-6-2; 10-1-1-13 IA 692.11 KS KY 17.147(4) LA Reg. LAC 1-18:10(1), (3) ME MD MA 6-171 MI MN 299C.10(2); Reg. 6 S.R. 274 MS 25-53-51(c); 45-27-7(1)(b) MO MT 44-2-202 NE 29-3518 NV NH NJ NM 29-3-9 NY NC Reg. NCAC 4E.0401 through .0403 ND OH 109.56 OK OR Reg. 257-10 PA PR RI SC Reg. 73-26D. SD TN 62-26-226 TX UT 53-5-209(4)(b) VT VI VA Reg. 3.3, 3.4 WA 10.97.090; Reg. WAC 446-20-240 WV WI WY ------------------------------- 25. Listing of information systems AL AK AZ AR CA CO 24-30-607 CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN 4-1-6-7 IA 22.11 KS KY LA ME MD MA Reg. 803 CMR 3.08 MI MN Reg. 6 S.R. 276 MS MO MT NE NV NH 7-A:2 NJ NM NY NC ND OH 1347.03 OK OR PA 18-9171 PR RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VI VA WA WV WI WY --------------------------- 26. Freedom of Information Act (including criminal justice information) AL AK AZ AR CA CO 24-72-301, 303 CT DE DC 1-1521 et seq. FL 119.01, .07; 943.053 GA 50-18-70 HI ID IL IN 4-1-6-1; 5-14-3-2(6) IA KS 45-215 et seq. KY 61.878 LA 44:3(4) ME 1-401-410 MD MA 66A-1 MI 15.231 et seq. MN 13.03, .80 et seq. MS 25-59-19 MO MT NE 29-3520 NV NH NJ NM NY Pub. Off. Law 87(2)(e) NC ND 44-04-18 OH OK 51-24A.8 OR 181.54 PA PR RI 38-2-1 SC SD "1-27-1" TN TX TRCS Art. 6252-17a(3)(a)(8) UT VT 1-317(b)(5) VI T.3-881(g) VA 2.1-342(b)(1) WA WV WI WY ----------------------------------- 27. Freedom of Information Act (excluding criminal justice information) AL AK 12.62.160(a) AZ 39-121.01 AR 12-12-909, 1003; 25-19-105 CA Gov. Code 6254 CO CT 4-190(i) DE 29-10002(d)(4) DC FL 119.07 GA HI 92-50; 92E-3 ID 9-340 IL 5-140/7(1)(d) IN IA KS KY 17-150(4); 61.878 LA 44:3(4) ME 1-401; 16-614(4A) MD State Gov't Code  10-611 et seq. MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH 91-A:5; 106-B:14 NJ Exec. Order 123 NM NY Pub. Off. Law 87(2)(e) NC ND OH 109.57(D); 1347.04 OK 51-24A.8 OR 192.5 PA PR RI 38-2-1 SC SD TN 10-7-504; 40-15-106(b), (c)(1); 40-32-101(b), (c)(1) TX TRCS Art. 6252-17a(3)(a)(8) UT 63-2-59 et seq.; 63-2-89 VT 1-317(b)(5); 20-2056 VI VA 2.1-342(b)(1); 2.1-384(3), (7) WA 42.17.250; 43.43.710 WV 29B-1-4 WI WY 9-1-627; 16-4-201 ------------------------------------ 28. Central State repository AL 41-9-591 AK 12.62.110(1) AZ 41-1750.A, 2205 AR 12-12-201, 207, 208, 1001 CA Pen. Code 11105 CO 24-33.5-401, 412 CT 29-11 DE 11-8501(b)(1) DC 4-132 FL 943.051 GA 35-3-31 HI 846-2, 2.5 ID 67-2910 IL 20-2605/55(a); 20-2630/8 IN 5-2-5-2; 10-1-1-12; 10-1-2.5-1 IA 690.1 KS 22-4705 KY 17.140, .151 LA 15:578(1) ME 25-1541 MD 27-747(b); Reg. 12.15.01.04 MA 6-168 MI 28.241 et seq. MN 299C.05, .06, .09 MS 45-27-7(1)(a) MO 43.500, .540 MT 44-5-213 NE 29-209, 210 NV 179A.075.1 NH 106-B:14 NJ 53:1-13 NM 29-3-1 NY Exec. Law 837(6) NC 114-10.1; 132-1.4 ND 12-60-07 OH 109.57(C) OK 74-150.9 OR 181.066 PA 18-9101 PR Act 1, 13; Reg. 6 RI "12-1-7" SC 23-3-110 SD 23-5-1, 2; 23-6-1 TN 38-6-101; 38-10-101 et seq. TX Code Crim. Proc., Art. 60.02; Gov't Code 411.042 UT 53-5-203, 214(5) VT 20-2051; Reg. 3.10 VI VA 19.2-388 WA 43.43.700 WV 15-2-24 WI 165.83, .84 WY 7-19-107(a) --------------------------- End of File pm 5/1/98