IN RE: Matthew M. COBADO (2018)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:  Petitioner appeals from a judgment that dismissed his CPLR article 78 petition seeking disclosure of certain documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law ( [FOIL] Public Officers Law art 6).  We affirm.  The District Attorney and the Deputy Chief Clerk of Cattaraugus County Court certified that their respective agencies do not possess the requested documents (see § 89[3][a];  see also Matter of Rattley v. New York City Police Dept., 96 N.Y.2d 873, 875, 730 N.Y.S.2d 768, 756 N.E.2d 56 [2001];  Matter of Gould v. New York City Police Dept., 89 N.Y.2d 267, 279, 653 N.Y.S.2d 54, 675 N.E.2d 808 [1996] ).  Even assuming, arguendo, that the documents requested by petitioner under FOIL exist, including the requested “Confidential Informant(s) Sheet(s)” and “cooperative agreement(s),” we note that records concerning confidential informants and cooperation agreements are expressly exempted from disclosure under FOIL (see § 87[2][e][i], [iii];  Brown v. Town of Amherst, 195 A.D.2d 979, 980, 600 N.Y.S.2d 601 [4th Dept. 1993] ).  Thus, contrary to petitioner's contention, the court properly dismissed the petition inasmuch as respondent's denial of petitioner's FOIL request was not affected by an error of law (see generally Matter of Spring v. County of Monroe, 141 A.D.3d 1151, 1151, 36 N.Y.S.3d 330 [4th Dept. 2016] ).