26-ORD-002 – Rusty Weddle/Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

Opinion Content:

January 9, 2026

In re: Rusty Weddle/Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

Summary: The Office cannot find that the Luther Luckett Correctional
Complex (“the Complex”) violated the Open Records Act (“the Act”),
because the Office cannot resolve the factual dispute between the parties
regarding the records provided.

Open Records Decision

Inmate Rusty Weddle (“Appellant”) submitted a request to the Complex for a
“copy of all commissary receipts from April 1, 2025[,] through September 24, 2025.”
The Appellant claims the Complex granted his request and charged him “$11.30” for
“78 pages” of responsive records.1 The Appellant initiated this appeal, claiming the
records he received are not the records he requested.

The Office has previously found that it cannot resolve a factual dispute
between the parties to an appeal. See, e.g., 22-ORD-010 (declining to resolve a factual
dispute that the records received were different from the records requested). Here,
the Appellant requested a “copy of all commissary receipts from April 1, 2025[,]
through September 24, 2025” and claims the records he received are not those he
requested. On appeal, the Complex states it “provided [the] Appellant with a copy of
the requested records.” More specifically, the Complex states it provided the
Appellant with “a copy of every commissary receipt that referenced Appellant by
name from April 1, 2025, through September 24, 2025.” As a result, a factual dispute
exists between the Appellant and the Complex as to whether the records the
Appellant received are the records responsive to his request. The Office is unable to

1 The Appellant did not provide a copy of the Complex’s response with his request for appeal.

resolve the factual dispute between the parties, and therefore, cannot find that the
Complex violated the Act.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating an action in the
appropriate circuit court under KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882 within 30 days from
the date of this decision. Under KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General shall be notified
of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that action or in
any subsequent proceedings. The Attorney General will accept notice of the complaint
emailed to [email protected].

Russell Coleman
Attorney General

/s/ Matthew Ray
Matthew Ray
Assistant Attorney General

Rusty Weddle #182312
Michelle Harrison
Nathan Goens
Charles Bates
Sarah Talarigo
Ann Smith