State v. Herc
2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 75
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- State appeals a circuit court's suppression order granting a motion to suppress Herc pharmacy records.
- Hercs were charged with trafficking in illegal drugs and multiple counts of obtaining drugs from a physician by withholding information.
- Trial court suppressed the Hercs' pharmacy records, finding detectives obtained them without notifying the Hercs or a warrant as required by section 456.057.
- Appellants concede the trial court lacked certain on-point authority but contend new authority allows obtaining pharmacy records without notification or a warrant.
- Court reverses the suppression of the Hercules' pharmacy records and remands to determine whether the physicians' statements to Detective Fowler should be suppressed under section 456.057(7).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether pharmacy records may be obtained without notice or warrant | State argues section 893.07(4) permits access without notice. | Hercs contend suppression not required where records were obtained improperly or where physician records may be treated differently. | Pharmacy records suppression reversed; records may be obtained without notice or warrant under cited authorities. |
| Whether physicians' records require consent or a warrant under 456.057(7) | State maintains physicians' records may be obtained with proper authorization or none required under statutory exceptions. | Hercs argue physicians' records and related statements should be suppressed absent consent or a warrant. | Remanded to determine whether physicians' statements to Detective Fowler are suppressible. |
| Whether remand for suppression determinations is proper | State supports remand to address suppression issues consistent with Shukitis. | Hercs request full suppression where applicable; remand clarifies scope. | Remanded with directions to address suppression of physicians' statements. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tamulonis, 39 So.3d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (permits access to records without patient notification under certain statutes)
- State v. Carter, 23 So.3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (permits obtaining controlled-substance records without notification)
- State v. Shukitis, 60 So.3d 406 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (clarifies scope of 456.057(6) and (7) regarding medical records)
- State v. Yutzy, 43 So.3d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (discusses physician-record access under statutory framework)