4. Investigatory records.

The Legislature has exempted from public inspection certain criminal intelligence and investigative records and files. Fla. Stat. § 119.07(3)(f) (1995). See Fla. Stat. § 119.011(3)(a), (b) and (c), (1995) (defining criminal intelligence and investigative information). See also, Rose v. D'Allessandro, 380 So.2d 419 (Fla. 1980) (complaints and affidavits received by a state attorney in discharge of his investigatory duties are subject to terms of statute relating to criminal investigative and intelligence information). The exemption includes criminal intelligence or investigative information received by a Florida criminal justice agency from a non-Florida criminal justice agency on a confidential or similarly restricted basis. Fla. Stat. § 119.072 (1995). The purpose of the intelligence/investigative information exemptions is to prevent premature disclosure of information when such disclosure could impede an ongoing investigation or allow a suspect to avoid apprehension or escape detection. See Tribune Co. v. Public Records, 493 So.2d 480 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), review denied, 503 So.2d 327; Tribune Co. v. Cannella, 438 So.2d 516 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), rev'd on other grounds, 458 So.2d 1075 (Fla. 1984), app. dismissed, 105 S.Ct. 2315 (1985).

The police investigative/intelligence records exemption only applies when such records are active. Fla. Stat. § 119.07(3)(b) (1995). Intelligence information is considered active "as long as it is related to intelligence gathering conducted with a reasonable, good faith belief that it will lead to detection of ongoing or reasonably anticipated criminal activities." Fla. Stat. § 119.011(d)(1) and (2) (1995). Investigative information is considered active "as long as it is related to an ongoing investigation which is continuing with a reasonable, good faith anticipation of securing an arrest or prosecution in the foreseeable future." Fla. Stat. § 119.011(3)(d)(2) (1995). See generally, Christy v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office, supra, 698 So.2d 1365 (thirteen years old arrest record which was not pertinent to pending prosecution was not exempt); Tribune Co. v. Cannella, supra, 438 So.2d 516 (information filed before the investigative process begins cannot be criminal investigative information, nor can such information be criminal investigative information, nor can such information be criminal intelligence information which is information collected in an effort to anticipate criminal activity). See also Op. Att'y Gen. Fla. 96-05 (1996) (criminal investigation of police officer is not exempt from public records disclosure requirements unless the record is deemed "active"). Cf. Fla. Freedom Newspapers Inc. v. Dempsey, 478 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (there is no fixed time limit for naming suspects or making arrests other than the applicable statute of limitations).

Criminal intelligence/investigative information is considered to be "active" while such information is directly related to pending prosecutions or appeals. Fla. Stat. § 119.011(d); see also Tal-Mason v. Satz, 614 So.2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied (Fla. 1993); News-Press Publ’g Co. Inc. v. Sapp, 464 So.2d 1335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Wells v. Sarasota Herald Tribune Co., 546 So.2d 1105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Tribune Co. v. Public Records, 493 So.2d 480, supra, (actions for post-conviction relief after a conviction has been affirmed on direct appeal are not pending appeals for purposes of section 119.011(3)(d)(2)). Cf. Satz v. Gore Newspaper Co., 395 So.2d 1274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (a state attorney's files on a civil matter which had been concluded contained criminal investigative information where testimony showed such information was and could be used to prevent and monitor possible criminal activity). Once the conviction and sentence have become final, the exemption no longer applies. State v. Kokal, 562 So.2d 324 (Fla. 1990).

Records disclosed to a criminal defendant are not exempt as investigative or intelligence information. Fla. Stat. § 119.011(3)(c)(5) (1995). See Satz v. Blankenship, 407 So.2d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), cert. denied, 413 So.2d 877 (Fla. 1982) (newspaper reporter was entitled to access to tape recordings concerning a defendant in a criminal prosecution where the recording had been disclosed to the criminal defendant); City of Miami v. Post-Newsweek Stations Fla. Inc., 837 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2002) (photograph of mayor's wife taken after alleged domestic assault and statement made to police were exempt where defendant had not made a discovery request for the documents); Bludworth v. Palm Beach Newspapers Inc., 476 So.2d 775 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 488 So.2d 67 (Fla. 1985) (documents given or required by law or agency rule to be given to a person arrested are disclosable to the public). But see, Fla. Newspapers Inc. v. McCrary, 13 F.L.W. 92 (Fla. 1988) (Supreme Court holds the trial court may temporarily seal materials given in discovery upon proper showing embodying the 3-part test set forth in State v. Bundy); City of Miami v. Metropolitan Dade County, 745 F. Supp. 683 (S.D. Fla. 1990) (public records law not applicable to actions of U.S. Attorney; U.S. Attorney's release of photographs to defendants during pretrial discovery in pending federal prosecution did not subject photographs to disclosure).