Court Opinion

ID: 7712109
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 19:13:21.446132+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:27:03.245418
License: Public Domain

POLEN, Judge,
concurring specially.
But for the court’s opinion in Rutherford, I would dissent, for the same reasons I expressed in my dissent, as well as those in Judge Farmer’s dissent, in Rutherford. I would also grant the appellee’s motion to certify the following question as being of great public importance:
WHERE THE STATE, IN THE COURSE OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, HAS OBTAINED A PATIENT’S MEDICAL RECORDS WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION 395.3025(4)(d), FLORIDA STATUTES, MAY THE STATE BE PERMITTED TO AGAIN SUBPOENA THOSE MEDICAL RECORDS AFTER SHOWING A COMPELLING INTEREST IN THE RECORDS AND AFTER SHOWING THAT THE RECORDS ARE RELEVANT TO A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION?