Advisory Opinions Library

Search and research 1,071 opinions published by the Minnesota Department of Administration (1993–present). New to the legal archive? Try Exploring by topic.

Showing 8 results in Data Subject Rights & Notice in Law enforcement data

Where this category sits in our topic hierarchy

Law Enforcement & Investigations (122 opinions) Law enforcement data

Narrow down within “Data Subject Rights & Notice”

Data subjects (125) Tennessen warning (45) Informed consent (19)

Advisory Opinion 11-015 11-015

November 1, 2011 · November 1, 2011; Clay County Attorney's Office

Should a prosecutor’s office require a release of information signed by the victim prior to releasing data to that victim’s legal representative under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.82, subdivision 13?

Data subjects Educational data Informed consent Law enforcement data #Authority to release #Confidential data #Victim access to active investigative data (13.82, subd. 13 / subd. 6)
Advisory Opinion 10-005 10-005

March 11, 2010 · March 11, 2010; Ramsey County Sheriff's Office

Did the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office comply with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, when it contacted gun “Permit to Carry” holders for a certain event?

Data subjects Educational data Law enforcement data Tennessen warning #Firearms (13.87, subd. 2 / 13.36) #Limitation on collection/use of data (13.05, subd. 4)
Advisory Opinion 02-009 02-009

March 13, 2002 · March 13, 2002; Crow Wing County

Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, and Minnesota Statutes, section 299C.11, did Crow Wing County respond appropriately to an August 9, 2000, request that certain data be returned to the data subject X? Pursuant…

Data subjects Law enforcement data
Advisory Opinion 02-008 02-008

March 13, 2002 · March 13, 2002; City of Brainerd

Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, and Minnesota Statutes, section 299C.11, did the City of Brainerd respond appropriately to an August 9, 2000, request that certain data be returned to the data subject X? Purs…

Data subjects Law enforcement data
Advisory Opinion 01-040 01-040

April 19, 2001 · April 19, 2001; City of Woodbury

If the City of Woodbury requires an individual to supply his/her Social Security number as part of applying for a firearm permit, has the City violated that individual's rights under state and federal law?

Data subjects Educational data Informed consent Law enforcement data Tennessen warning #Background checks #Data necessary for administration and management of programs (13.05, subd. 3) #Firearms background check #Tennessen warning and federal Privacy Act notices required #Tennessen warning notice
Advisory Opinion 96-011 96-011

March 6, 1996 · March 6, 1996; Minnesota Department of Human Services

Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.05, subdivision 4, and Minnesota Rules Part 1205.1300, how may DHS use and/or disseminate the data which relate to K's commitment as a minor, contained on the

Data subjects Educational data Law enforcement data Legislative authority and intent Tennessen warning Welfare data #Authority to regulate data practices #Classification at time of request, controls access (13.03, subd. 9) #Commitment pre-petition screening #Firearms background check #Limitation on collection and use of private/confidential data (13.05, subd. 4)

+2 more
#State hospital directory information #Tennessen warning notice (13.04, subd. 2)
Advisory Opinion 94-040 94-040

October 5, 1994 · October 5, 1994; City of Buffalo

When an employee of the City of Buffalo didn't know what the classification of a piece of private data was, did that constitute a violation of the minor child's rights by impeding access to government data and not apply…

Copy costs Data subjects Educational data Law enforcement data #Challenge accuracy and completeness of data #Flat or standard fee #Juveniles (260.161 / 260B.171) #Law enforcement data #Operating expenses excluded
Advisory Opinion 94-003 94-003

January 4, 1994 · January 4, 1994; City of Waseca

Did the police department violate Minnesota Statute Section 13.04, Subdivision 3 by refusing to provide Y all of the records regarding X within the five day timeline, which began to run on October 9, 1992? Was the polic…

Data subjects Educational data Law enforcement data #Data access to data subject #Informed of existence/classification #Subject's right to know #Victim access to active investigative data (13.82, subd. 13 / subd. 6)