The Nevada Supreme Court unanimously declined to create a blanket rule blocking public access to records in open criminal cases, stating that creating exemptions to the Nevada Public Records Act is the Legislature’s responsibility, not the judiciary’s. The decision came in a case stemming from a 2023 traffic stop involving Reno police Officer Tyler Baehr, who is accused of taking Erica Bluth’s phone, viewing her photo gallery, and capturing intimate materials. Bluth filed public records requests with Sparks and Reno for reports, body-camera footage, and communications containing her name, but both cities denied the requests, citing active litigation and claiming open criminal cases are confidential.
Sparks Senior Assistant City Attorney Mariah Northington urged the court to establish an objective legal standard treating active criminal cases as confidential, a position supported by attorneys for the Metropolitan Police Department and the cities of Las Vegas and North Las Vegas. However, Maggie McLetchie, representing the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Nevada Press Association, and Nevada Open Government Coalition, argued that such a rule would give law enforcement unilateral control over public records and greatly erode public trust. The court agreed, noting Sparks had presented 'no compelling reasons for what would effectively rewrite our NPRA jurisprudence.'
In February 2025, Washoe County District Judge Barry Breslow ordered Bluth receive redacted records pertaining to her case, but Sparks appealed, claiming the judge abused his discretion. The Supreme Court’s ruling upholds that investigative files are not exempt from the Nevada Public Records Act, with Review-Journal Chief Legal Officer Ben Lipman stating the publication was glad the high court affirmed this principle and hoped it ends the illegal practice of categorically withholding records based on the rejected claim.
Sources: Las Vegas Review-Journal
Original reporting: Las Vegas Review-Journal →
English (US)·