The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34, 35, 36 were read on this motion to/for ARTICLE 78 (BODY OR OFFICER) DECISION ORDER ON MOTION Upon the foregoing documents, it is ORDERED that the petition for relief, pursuant to CPLR Article 78, of Petitioner Dioso Faustino (Motion Seq. 001) is denied and the cross-motion by Respondent The City of New York seeking to deny the petition and dismiss the proceeding is granted; and it is further ORDERED that Petitioner’s application for reasonable attorney’s fees is denied. CASE DISPOSED MEMORANDUM DECISION In this Article 78 proceeding, Petitioner Dioso Faustino seeks an order to compel Respondents to produce certain law enforcement records pursuant to Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) §84, as well as Respondents’ obligations under Public Officers Law §89 (3). Respondents cross-move for an order, pursuant to CPLR §§7804(f) and 3211(a), denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. BACKGROUND FACTS The dispute that underlies this proceeding concerns a FOIL request sent by Petitioner to Respondents for New York City Police Department (NYPD) body worn camera footage. On December 9, 2018, members of the NYPD were summoned to Petitioner’s residence in Staten Island after receiving a 911 call regarding a domestic disturbance at the residence. During the subsequent confrontation with the police, Petitioner Faustino Dioso was shot and fatally wounded (NYSCEF doc No. 16, 4). On February 22, 2019, Petitioner’s widow through her counsel sought access, pursuant to FOIL §84, of the body worn camera footage worn by the officers involved (NYSCEF doc No. 3). Respondents acknowledged receipt of the request and indicated that a response should be expected in July 2019 (NYSCEF doc No. 4). On July 11, 2019, Petitioner appealed an alleged “constructive denial” of the request. However, Respondents did not issue their formal denial until July 16. The denial held that access to the body worn camera footage was exempt from FOIL pursuant to Public Officers Law §87, along with a variety of other Public Health Law provisions (NYSCEF doc No. 7). Respondents’ Records Access Appeals Officer (RAAO) then denied Petitioner’s appeal on the grounds that it was premature as it was submitted before the determination, and as access to the requested records would interfere with the ongoing NYPD Force Investigation Division investigation regarding the night of the incident (NYSCEF doc No. 8). On August 5, 2019, Petitioner administratively appealed the July 16 denial. By electronic mail sent August 12, the RAAO denied the administrative appeal on several grounds, including that disclosure of the law enforcement records sought pursuant to FOIL would interfere with a pending law enforcement investigation (NYSCEF doc No. 8). Petitioner then commenced this Article 78 proceeding on November 14, seeking an annulment of Respondent’s denial as well as an order requiring Respondents to make the body camera footage available. Petitioner also alleged that Respondent did not timely respond to the FOIL request. On December 3, Respondents cross-moved to dismiss this proceeding on the grounds that the records sought by Petitioner are exempt from disclosure pursuant to N.Y. Public Officers Law §87(2)(e)(i), which proscribes disclosure of law enforcement records where such disclosure would interfere with a law enforcement investigation.1 In January 2020, the NYPD concluded its internal Force Investigation of the subject incident. Petitioner’s counsel affirms that he received two hours of body camera footage of the NYPD officers, produced in eight parts, on January 21, 2020 and January 30, 2020 (NYSCF doc No. 36,
