Attorney General Opinion No.
Background
- DOC provides location data for persons in custody under KORA; expanded in 1997 to include non-facility custodians such as parolees and releasees.
- Some custody-released individuals may be at facilities for alcohol/drug evaluation or treatment, potentially triggered by supervision or court orders.
- Federal law protects privacy of alcohol/drug treatment records; disclosure of patient identifying information is restricted absent consent or permitted release.
- HIPAA privacy rules restrict health information disclosures; HIPAA preempts state law if conflict arises.
- KORA requires disclosure of location information for those in custody, but federal confidentiality and HIPAA preemption may bar such disclosure for individuals in treatment facilities.
- Conclusion: Disclosure of an in-custody individual’s address while residing at a treatment facility is prohibited absent consent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does KORA conflict with federal confidentiality for treatment records? | KORA requires location data for releasees. | Federal confidentiality preempts state law. | Yes, preemption prevents disclosure. |
| Are patient identifying details, including facility address, disclosable under KORA when tied to treatment? | Address may identify the patient; location disclosure possible. | Federal rules prohibit disclosure of patient identifying information. | Not disclosable. |
| Does HIPAA preempt state law governing release of health information in this context? | HIPAA prohibits such disclosures. | HIPAA preempts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mosier v. American Home Patient, Inc., 170 F. Supp. 2d 1211 (N.D. Fla. 2001) (federal confidentiality provisions apply to patient records)