Marvin Hunter, Appellant V. Dept. Of Corrections, Respondent (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
F1.: tl MIRT OF APPEALS DMSIB ii 2014 FEB - 4 AM 9= 19 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON S IAA c 0i= tiMS1-11 ? 4OT011 DIVISION II B` r'__ No. 44675 -8 -II MARVIN HUNTER, Appellant, 0 UNPUBLISHED OPINION WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Marvin Hunter appeals from the trial court' s denial of his request for an PENOYAR, J. in camera review 1 records of documents Department of Corrections ( DOC) withheld after a public The court based its decision on its sua sponte determination that Hunter' s request. counsel' s May 3, 2010 letter, requesting the opportunity to review Hunter' s DOC central file, 2 was not a request for records under the Public Records Act ( PRA) . DOC concedes that the trial court erred when it determined that Hunter' s counsel' s letter was not a request under the PRA. It asks that' we remand to the trial court for the court to exercise its discretion in determining whether an in camera review is needed and for further proceedings consistent with that determination. Hunter agrees with the concession of error but asks that we direct the trial court to conduct the in camera review that he requested, contending that that court has no discretion to refuse to conduct an in camera review. Seattle Times Co. v. Serko, 170 Wn.2d 581, 593 -94, 243 P. 3d 919 ( 2010). I A commissioner of this court initially considered Hunter' s appeal as a motion on the merits under RAP 18. 14 and then transferred it to a panel of judges. He also appeals from the trial court' s March 21, 2013 order granting him attorney fees only as to the 10 pages of documents that DOC untimely produced. CP 666 -68. 2 Ch. 42. 56 RCW. 44675 -8 -II We accept DOC' s concession of error and decline to direct the trial court in the way Hunter requests. Accordingly, we vacate the trial court' s January 4, 2013 order on plaintiff' s motion for partial summary judgment and for in camera inspection, its January 24, 2013 ruling denying Hunter' s motion for reconsideration of the January 4, 2013 Order, and its March 21, 2013 order and further refer judgment proceedings, Hunter' on plaintiff' s motion including s request a determination for attorney fees for attorney fees of whether an on appeal to the trial in and penalties. camera review court, under We remand for is required. We RCW 42. 56. 550( 4), but we award Hunter his statutory costs on appeal, under chapter 4. 84 RCW. We vacate and remand to the trial court for further proceedings. A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2. 06. 040, it is so ordered. J Maxa, J. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
