Judge keeps order blocking release of Chatfield search warrant affidavits

An Ingham County circuit judge on Tuesday maintained an order stopping the release of several search warrant affidavits related to the state's investigation into former Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield.

Judge Wanda Stokes denied a request from the Detroit Free Press and Bridge Michigan to intervene and kept largely unchanged her Nov. 21 stay order keeping the affidavits secret after a Tuesday hearing on the matter.

But Stokes ordered Assistant Attorney General Michael Frezza to notify the publications when the state files an appeal over a lower court order that had required the search warrants be released. Frezza said the appeals section of Attorney General Dana Nessel's office is preparing the filing.

"This court certainly is not interested in trying to create an environment where information is being withheld from the public," Stokes said. "That would certainly be a miscarriage of justice."

The Detroit Free Press and Bridge Michigan, called the "press intervenors" in court filings, filed an ex parte motion in October in Lansing's 54-A District court seeking the release of search warrant affidavits related to Chatfield, a Levering Republican who is being investigated by Nessel's office on allegations of sexual assault and financial wrongdoing.

Search warrant affidavits released to The Detroit News in October indicated police in April were investigating allegations against Chatfield that include criminal enterprise, drug possession and campaign finance violations. The court later said the affidavits were released to The News in error.

Chatfield has denied the allegations, arguing his relationship with his sister-in-law was a consensual affair when they were both adults. Lee Chatfield's attorney, Mary Chartier, also has said the former speaker "vehemently denies" the affidavits' allegations.

In November, 54-A District Judge Stacia Buchanan ordered the release of search warrant affidavits she issued in the Chatfield investigation but Nessel's office asked Stokes to issue a stay blocking Buchanan's order.

Stokes issued the stay a day before the search warrant affidavits were set to be released while the attorney general sought to appeal the district court's decision.

The press intervenors asked Stokes in pleadings and in Tuesday's hearing to clarify what documents or proceedings are affected by the stay, to set a timeline for Nessel to file an appeal and to be provided notice of the appeal in time for the press intervenors to decide whether to intervene in the case.

The default disposition of search warrant documents is that they are public, said Robin Luce-Herrmann, an attorney for the Free Press and Bridge. But the attorney general's view of the documents is that they are suppressed until the office decides otherwise, Luce-Herrmann argued Tuesday before Stokes.

"You could interpret the attorney general's position as the following: We get to do everything ex parte. There’s no limit on it, unless we decide there's a limit. And nobody can challenge us," Luce-Herrmann said.

Frezza argued the media outlets lacked standing as they sought to intervene in what amounted to a law enforcement action. He said a decision releasing the document could open the door to "other, less reputable media outlets" also gaining access to information before an investigation is concluded.

"I appreciate the press' role in our democracy, but it does not have — I would suggest — the authority, as free as the press is, to suggest or tell a court how to monitor its docket,” Frezza said.

He said the search warrant affidavits would eventually be released at the end of the investigation and maintained state law allowed for the ongoing suppression.

But Buchanan in her November order releasing the search warrant affidavits had ruled the laws governing search warrants were limited in scope, allowing for a 56-day suppression, then requiring a request to extend the suppression order.

Laws allowing for the suppression order to remain in effect until the close of the investigation were limited to blocking the release of an affidavit from the person whose property was searched or seized under a search warrant, she wrote.

Staff writer Craig Mauger contributed.

eleblanc@detroitnews.com