request for information will result in costs over $40.00, to provide cost estimate to requestor identifying and explaining charges to be imposed). Those documents are not the subject of this appeal; the only documents at issue here are those the DA sought to withhold. 34 . Id. § 552.101. 35 . Because we conclude that the DA provided evidence to support the trial court’s determination that there were compelling reasons to withhold the documents from disclosure, we do not reach the DA’s argument that it was not required to show a compelling reason. 36 . 166 S.W.3d 342 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2005, no pet.). 37 . Id. at 350. 38 . Id. (‘TTjhe governmental body must ... show that its cl g that logs of inmate correspondence are confidential by constitutional law); Tex. Att'y Gen. ORD-100 (1975) (<HOLDING>). 43 . Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 552.101,
holding that portions of library circulation records linking identities of individual patrons to materials accessed by those patrons are confidential by constitutional law holding that lists of persons who visited with inmates are exempt from disclosure because information is confidential by constitutional law holding that daily reports prepared by agency investigator were not records within a system of records since they were retrievable by the investigators identifier and not accessed by plaintiffs name holding records did not qualify as exempt confidential commercial information under exemption 4 because the information was not actually confidential holding that during a postriot lockdown refusal of access to main law library is constitutional as long as access to basic law library for initial legal research is permitted