Can a Delaware citizen FOIA the police call logs and CAD records for a specific address, with personal info redacted?
Plain-English summary
Renee Edge sent the Delaware State Police a FOIA request on August 24, 2025 seeking all calls for service, CAD logs, incident reports, and 911 call recordings tied to a specific property address, going back to January 1, 2008. She also asked for any nuisance-property designation records.
DSP denied the entire request, citing four exemptions: (1) the investigatory files exemption under § 10002(o)(3), (2) the criminal records exemption under § 10002(o)(4), (3) statutory exclusions including LEOBOR (Title 11, Chapters 85 and 86) under § 10002(o)(6), and (4) the security records exemption under § 10002(o)(17).
Edge petitioned, arguing the denial was overbroad and that the State could at least produce CAD logs and call summaries with personal identifiers (names of callers, witnesses, victims) redacted.
The AG sided with DSP. Section 10002(o)(3) exempts "investigatory files compiled for civil or criminal law-enforcement purposes" as a category. The investigatory files exemption attaches as soon as DSP is made aware of a potential issue (per News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley, 1980 WL 3043 (Del. Ch. 1980)) and survives the closure of the investigation. Calls for service to a particular property, on their face, would initiate police investigation, so they are part of the investigatory file. Redaction does not save the request because the underlying records are exempt as a category, not just because they contain personal identifiers.
Two prior AG opinions decided the exact same question the same way: 25-IB14 (Feb. 28, 2025) and 24-IB11 (Feb. 23, 2024). The line is settled.
What this means for you
If you are trying to investigate a problem property
Calls for service and CAD logs are not reachable through Delaware FOIA. The categorical exemption blocks them. If you are dealing with a problem neighbor, a slumlord property, or an alleged nuisance, your alternative paths are:
- Court records. If law enforcement charged anyone, the resulting court file is public.
- Civil discovery. If you have a legal dispute (landlord-tenant, neighbor harassment, nuisance), discovery in litigation can reach materials FOIA cannot.
- County code enforcement files. Building and code complaints may be similarly protected, but ask anyway. Some jurisdictions release more than DSP does.
- Public meeting records. If the property has been discussed at council meetings or town halls, those minutes are public.
- Direct request to the property owner. They may have insurance, security, or other records they will share.
If you are a journalist covering a public-safety story
Bulk-anonymized calls-for-service data may be available through aggregate releases that DSP issues separately. Quarterly statistical reports, if any, are not "investigatory files" of specific calls. Ask DSP if they publish summary data, and check whether the records are searchable through any open-data initiatives.
If you are a tenant or property buyer doing due diligence
You will not get DSP records. But you can:
- Search court records for cases involving the address.
- Check Sussex/New Castle/Kent County land records for liens or judgments.
- Search local newspaper archives.
- Talk to neighbors and former tenants.
If you are a real estate or landlord-tenant attorney
For nuisance-property claims and similar actions, advise clients that DSP records will not be available pre-suit. The path is to file the action and use civil discovery (subpoena to DSP under court rules) once litigation is open. The investigatory exemption does not block civil discovery the way it blocks FOIA.
If you are a Delaware police records officer
The categorical investigatory files exemption is well-settled. When you receive a request for calls for service or CAD logs by address, deny under § 10002(o)(3), citing the consistent line of AG opinions. You do not need to do a record-by-record analysis or offer redacted alternatives, because the records are exempt as a category.
Background and statutory framework
29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3) exempts "[i]nvestigatory files compiled for civil or criminal law-enforcement purposes including pending investigative files, pretrial and presentence investigations and child custody and adoption files where there is no criminal complaint at issue."
The exemption is categorical. News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley, 1980 WL 3043 (Del. Ch. Nov. 20, 1980), held that the exemption attaches as soon as a public body is aware of a potential issue and survives even after the investigation closes. So records of completed investigations are still exempt.
Multiple AG opinions reinforce the rule for calls for service and CAD logs specifically: 25-IB14 (Feb. 28, 2025); 24-IB11 (Feb. 23, 2024); 17-IB47 (Sept. 22, 2017); 17-IB05 (Mar. 10, 2017); 05-IB16 (Jun. 22, 2005); 98-IB13 (Dec. 8, 1998). The pattern: DSP receives a call about a specific address, dispatches an officer, generates a CAD entry and an incident report. All three pieces of paper are part of the investigatory file. Even if no charges are filed, even decades later, the records remain exempt.
Redaction is not a workaround. Section 10002(o)(3) excludes the entire category from "public record," not just specific identifiers. Compare this to other exemptions (e.g., § 10002(o)(1) for personnel files) where the exemption is specifically about privacy and redaction may be appropriate.
Common questions
Why is the investigatory files exemption so broad?
The Billingsley court explained that the exemption protects the integrity of law-enforcement investigations and protects sources who might come forward with information. If callers and witnesses knew their reports could be released through FOIA, they might not call. So the exemption attaches at first awareness and survives after closure.
Can I get a list of nuisance properties in Delaware?
A specific list of nuisance properties may be exempt under § 10002(o)(17) (security records) or § 10002(o)(3) (investigatory files), depending on how it is maintained. The opinion notes DSP raised the security records exemption for the nuisance designation aspect. The categorical answer is "no" through FOIA.
If a property has been formally adjudicated as a nuisance through court proceedings, the court records are public.
What if I am the homeowner of the property in question?
The exemption applies regardless of who is requesting. Even the property owner cannot use FOIA to obtain the calls-for-service records for their own address. There may be other routes (e.g., if there is litigation involving the property, or if you are a victim of an event, you may have access through victim-rights or similar processes).
What is the difference between the investigatory files exemption and the criminal records exemption?
Section 10002(o)(3) is investigatory files compiled for law-enforcement purposes. Section 10002(o)(4) is criminal records (criminal histories, fingerprint cards, mugshots that have not been publicly released) protected by Title 11 of the Delaware Code. Some records fit both categories; DSP often cites both in denials. Either is sufficient on its own.
What about LEOBOR (the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights)?
LEOBOR (11 Del. C. ch. 92, with related provisions in chapters 85 and 86) provides confidentiality for police internal affairs records and certain other materials. Section 10002(o)(6) exempts records "specifically excluded from public disclosure by statute or common law," and LEOBOR materials fall there. DSP cited this for completeness, but the investigatory files exemption was sufficient on its own for the requested calls for service.
Can civil discovery get me the records?
Yes, the investigatory files exemption is a FOIA exemption. It does not block civil discovery in a pending case. If you have litigation where the calls-for-service records are relevant and proportional, the rules of civil procedure govern access. Courts may order disclosure with appropriate protective orders.
What about federal FOIA?
Federal FOIA is a separate statute applying to federal agencies. Calls for service to a Delaware address are held by Delaware State Police, not a federal agency. So federal FOIA does not reach these records. (If federal authorities investigated the property, federal FOIA would apply to the federal records, with similar but not identical exemptions under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7).)
Are the 911 audio recordings ever public?
In limited circumstances. Under some Delaware AG opinions, 911 audio that has been admitted into evidence in a court proceeding may become accessible through court records. But the categorical FOIA exemption applies to the recordings as held by DSP.
Citations
- Statutes: 29 Del. C. §§ 10001-10008 (FOIA); § 10002(o)(3) (investigatory files); § 10002(o)(4) (criminal records); § 10002(o)(6) (statutory exclusions); § 10002(o)(17) (security records); § 10003(a) (right of access); § 10005(c) (burden of proof); 11 Del. C. chapters 85 and 86 (criminal records and LEOBOR-adjacent provisions).
- Cases: Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Univ. of Del., 267 A.3d 996 (Del. 2021); News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley, 1980 WL 3043 (Del. Ch. Nov. 20, 1980).
- Prior AG opinions: 25-IB14 (Feb. 28, 2025); 24-IB11 (Feb. 23, 2024); 17-IB47 (Sept. 22, 2017); 17-IB05 (Mar. 10, 2017); 05-IB16 (Jun. 22, 2005); 98-IB13 (Dec. 8, 1998).
Source
- Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/2025/10/20/25-ib52-10-20-25-foia-opinion-letter-to-renee-edge-re-delaware-state-police-department-of-safety-and-homeland-security/
- Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2025/10/Attorney-General-Opinion-No.-25-IB52.pdf
Original opinion text
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Attorney General Opinion No. 25-IB52
October 20, 2025
VIA EMAIL
Renee Edge
[email protected]
RE: FOIA Petition Regarding the Delaware State Police, Department of Safety and Homeland Security
Dear Renee Edge:
We write in response to your correspondence alleging that the Delaware State Police, Department of Safety and Homeland Security ("DSP") violated Delaware's Freedom of Information Act, 29 Del. C. §§ 10001-10008 ("FOIA"). We treat your correspondence as a Petition for a determination pursuant to 29 Del. C. § 10005 of whether a violation of FOIA has occurred or is about to occur. For the reasons set forth below, we determine that the DSP did not violate FOIA by denying access to the requested records.
BACKGROUND
On August 24, 2025, you submitted a FOIA request to the DSP for records "pertaining to calls for service, reports, or other records involving" a certain property address from January 1, 2008 to the present. The request includes calls for service reports and CAD logs, incident reports or officer response reports, records identifying individuals who contacted the DSP regarding this address, and 911 call recordings or transcripts of such calls. You also sought any records indicating that this property had been designated as a nuisance property or has been the subject of any nuisance-related proceedings or adjudications by the DSP.
The DSP denied this request, citing the exemptions for investigatory file records for criminal law enforcement purposes under 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3); criminal records under 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(4); records exempt from disclosure by statute or common law under 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(6), to include the right of privacy and Title 11, Chapters 85 and 86 of the Delaware Code, and security records under 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(17). This Petition followed.
In the Petition, you contend that the DSP's denial of the entirety of the request was overbroad. You state that while you understand personal identifiers or certain investigatory records may be exempt, public bodies are required to release nonexempt portions of records whenever reasonably possible. You seek, at a minimum, that the DSP produce "CAD logs, or call summaries showing the number, dates, and general nature of calls for service to this property, with personal identifying information of complainants, witnesses, or victims removed."
On July 11, 2025, the DSP, through its legal counsel, replied to the Petition ("Response"). The DSP argues that the investigatory files exemption applies, as the request is "related to law enforcement incidents initiated from phone calls (from which call sheets are generated), placed by individuals and involving the specified address." The DSP further contends that because this request involves reports related to criminal incidents, it triggers the criminal and confidential record exceptions pursuant to 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(4) and § 10002(o)(6), including 11 Del. C. Chapters 85 and 86. Finally, the DSP argues that the security records exemption in 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(17) is applicable, as the request for records indicating the property has been flagged as a nuisance refers to information maintained in the 911 records to aid law enforcement in calls for service.
DISCUSSION
FOIA requires that citizens be provided reasonable access to and reasonable facilities for the copying of public records. The public body has the burden of proof to justify its denial of access to records. In certain circumstances, a sworn affidavit may be required to meet that burden.
Section 10002(o)(3) exempts "[i]nvestigatory files compiled for civil or criminal law-enforcement purposes including pending investigative files, pretrial and presentence investigations and child custody and adoption files where there is no criminal complaint at issue." In this Petition, you allege that CAD logs or call summaries should be produced with redaction of the personal identifying information of complainants, witnesses, or victims. "[F]or purposes of FOIA, the investigatory exemption attaches as soon as an agency is first made aware of a potential issue." This exemption is not limited to pending investigations and continues to apply after an investigation is closed. This request seeks the call records with the number, date, and type of calls for service to the DSP from a particular property; such calls, on their face, would initiate police investigation for civil or criminal law enforcement purposes. Thus, the requested call records are part of investigatory files and fully exempt from disclosure pursuant to 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3).
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the DSP did not violate FOIA by denying access to the requested logs and call summaries.
Very truly yours,
Daniel Logan
Chief Deputy Attorney General
cc: Joseph C. Handlon, Deputy Attorney General; Dorey L. Cole, Deputy Attorney General