Nevada justices hear arguments over secrecy of records in active criminal cases

The question of whether the public should have access to records in open criminal cases was at the center of arguments heard Thursday by the Nevada Supreme Court.

Media attorneys said the high court’s decision in a case involving the city of Sparks’ refusal to release records related to a 2023 traffic stop in Reno could weaken the state’s public records laws.

“The result would be devastating to government accountability and transparency in Nevada,” Las Vegas Review-Journal Chief Legal Officer Ben Lipman said.

The Nevada Public Records Act could change if justices side with the city of Sparks in its assertion that documents from an ongoing investigation are confidential and not subject to disclosure.

“We believe this case is a good mechanism to provide guidance to government agencies and requesters across the state,” Mariah Northington, Sparks’ senior assistant city attorney, told the seven justices.

Chief Justice Douglas Herndon asked Northington for clarification, specifically whether she wanted the high court to establish a blanket rule against access of records from an ongoing investigation.

“In the best-case scenario, Judge, yes, I would like a bright-line rule,” Northington replied. “It is the city of Sparks’ position and the position of many government agencies that open and active criminal case files are confidential.”

Attorneys for the Metropolitan Police Department and the cities of Las Vegas and North Las Vegas also have voiced support for adopting such a rule.

“The reason we’re here is because we keep getting sued for not providing these records,” Northington added.

The court did not say when it would make a decision.

‘Promoting government accountability’

The documents in dispute Thursday concerned a 2023 traffic stop where former Reno police officer Tyler Baehr allegedly took a woman’s phone and copied “intimate” photos from it.

Baehr, who has denied the allegations, since has been charged in federal court with two counts of deprivation of rights under color of law.

The woman’s attorney, Luke Busby, previously filed a public records request for body-camera footage and communications that included her name. The request was denied, prompting a lawsuit against the cities of Reno and Sparks after the investigation was transferred to Sparks police.

In February 2025, Washoe County District Judge Barry Breslow ordered that the woman, Erica Bluth, receive redacted records pertaining to her. However, lawyers for Sparks argued that the judge “abused (his) discretion” by ordering partial disclosure and said the order should be reversed.

Busby and another attorney, Maggie McLetchie, took issue with the judge’s decision, as they argued that all the public, rather than just Bluth, should have access to the records.

Busby said Northington’s proposal before the court Thursday was not a legal argument but a lobbying pitch “directed at the wrong branch of government.”

Attorneys for the city are “adopting a categorical exemption for active investigation files that the Legislature has never enacted,” Busby added.

McLetchie, who was not a party to the case but presented arguments to the court on behalf of the Review-Journal, the Nevada Press Association and the Nevada Open Government Coalition, said the dispute centered on law enforcement agencies’ desire to control the release of information.

“They release information about criminal cases all the time,” McLetchie said. “So what they’re really arguing is that they get to control the flow of information. That argument cannot stand, in light of the underpinnings of the Public Records Act and the goal of promoting government accountability.”

McLetchie asked the Supreme Court to order the production of the records, making redactions to documents such as nude photos to protect the privacy of victims.

“Access denied means no accountability for victims or the public,” she said.

Contact Akiya Dillon at adillon@reviewjournal.com.