October 15, 2026 - 7:55 pm

The Nevada Supreme Court on Thursday declined to create a blanket rule blocking public access to records in open criminal cases.

The city of Sparks had presented “no compelling reasons for what would effectively rewrite our NPRA jurisprudence,” the court wrote in a footnote to its decision, referring to the Nevada Public Records Act.

In the unanimous decision, the justices said creating exemptions to the state’s public records act is the Legislature’s job, not theirs.

The matter came before the court for oral arguments in August and stemmed from a 2023 traffic stop involving Reno police Officer Tyler Baehr. During the stop, Baehr took Erica Bluth’s phone, viewed her photo gallery and used his own phone to “capture intimate materials found there,” according to the opinion.

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

Bluth, who was later interviewed by police, filed public records requests with both Sparks and Reno, including for reports, body-camera footage and communications containing her name. Sparks had taken over the investigation.

Reno said it had nothing responsive to the requests for reports and body-camera footage, but identified 40 potentially responsive emails. Bluth asked for 14 of them, but Reno refused, citing concerns related to active litigation. Sparks also denied Bluth’s request for similar reasons.

Bluth and her attorney sued the cities and in February 2025, Washoe County District Judge Barry Breslow ordered that 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.

In August, Sparks Senior Assistant City Attorney Mariah Northington told the seven justices at the state’s top court that the city considers open and active criminal cases confidential.

She urged the court to establish an objective legal standard supporting that position. Attorneys for the Metropolitan Police Department and the cities of Las Vegas and North Las Vegas also voiced support for such a rule.

Maggie McLetchie — who represented the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the Nevada Press Association and the Nevada Open Government Coalition during oral arguments — said the rule would have given law enforcement unilateral control over the release of public records.

“That would greatly erode public trust,” McLetchie said.

Review-Journal Chief Legal Officer Ben Lipman said the publication was glad the high court again affirmed that investigative files are not exempt from the Nevada Public Records Act.

”We hope this finally ends the ongoing illegal practice of so many governmental entities that categorically withhold records based on that rejected claim,” he said.

Contact Akiya Leggio at aleggio@reviewjournal.com.