brief to the attorney general, the department listed nine lawsuits involving the use of force that it claimed were pending against the department and attached a representative sample of the information requested, including an Internal Affairs Division investigation file (“IAD file”), and an individual prisoner file of an inmate in the Harris County Jail. In a letter ruling, the attorney general determined that while some of the responsive information was excepted from disclosure under the litigation exception, “completed reports,” expressly made public under the Act, and “basic information,” deemed public by Houston Chronicle Publishing Co. v. City of Houston, were public information that must be released. 581 S.W.2d 177, 186-87 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1975) (“Chronicle I”) (<HOLDING>), writ ref'd n.r.e., 536 S.W.2d 559 (Tex.1976)
recognizing relevance of information and that need for this information outweighs the burden to appellants holding that certain information on police blotter show up and arrest sheets and front page of offense report are public information holding that due process was violated where a death sentence was imposed based on information in a presentence report and the defendant was not given an opportunity to deny or explain the information holding that police were justified in arresting person on basis of information provided directly to police by named citizen informer reliance on the information was justified in part because the informant by giving her name presumably knew that the police could arrest her for making a false report holding that information from confidential informant was reliable and credible where affidavit referred to previous instances in which informant provided correct information to police affiants own investigation and controlled buy of contraband confirmed information and second informant supplied same information to police