|
In the matter of Guardardo v. The State of Florida the appellate court reversed defendant's convictions for DUI manslaughter as well as Unlawful Blood Alcohol Level (UBAL) and ordered a new trial. Defendant was involved in a three-car collision. Both passengers in the defendant's vehicle were killed. A trooper observed defendant in the driver's seat with injuries to the defendant's face; the other two occupants did not appear to be living. The defendant was removed from the automobile and taken to the hospital, where the trooper requested that blood samples be taken. A 6 count charging document was filed with the clerk charging defendant with two counts of DUI manslaughter; 2 counts of DUI manslaughter unlawful blood alcohol level; as well as 2 counts of DUI property damage. The defendant filed a written plea of not guilty to the 2 charges of DUI manslaughter (UBAL). The State of Florida notified the defendant that the State wanted to subpoena defendant's medical records. Defendant objected, however the circuit court granted the state authorization to subpoena defendant's medical records based on the State of Florida's compelling interest. The defendant submitted an amended motion to suppress, asserting the State of Florida's motion to subpoena the records was predicated exclusively on the results of the blood draw completed at the request of the State Trooper.  During the hearing regarding defendant's motion to suppress, the state agreed that the state trooper did not have probable cause to withdraw the legal blood. The State of Florida additionally admitted that there was no information in the State of Florida's file that could have constituted independent probable cause at the time the medical blood subpoena was issued. The trial court judge entered an order suppressing the legal blood draw & denying the motion to suppress regarding regarding the medical blood results, ruling the relevance of the medical blood results was obvious & that a compelling state interest existed in order to support the admission. Due to the motion to suppress being denied, Defendant then entered a plea of no contest, specifically reserving the right to appeal the denial of defendant's dispositive motion to suppress. The defendant was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in a Florida State Prison, followed by 5 years probation on each count, to be served concurrently. On appeal, the defendant argued that the circuit court erred by failing to suppress the medical blood because the subpoena issued for the medical blood was based exclusively upon legal blood, which the State of Florida admitted was illegally obtained. Defendant further stated that the State of Florida failed to establish the relevance of the medical blood since it failed to establish a link connecting the medical blood and the accident. The State of Florida contended that the circuit court correctly found that the medical blood was relevant because even if the medical blood evidence was initially released pursuant to the subpoena based exclusively on the illegally seized legal blood evidence, any error was harmless in that the additional information in the probable cause affidavit would have also justified the issuance of a subpoena. The State of Florida also stated that any crash together with a death always makes medical blood relevant. The 4th District Court of Appeal ruled that, notwithstanding the unlawfully obtained legal blood evidence, the State of Florida did not show a nexus connecting the medical records subpoenaed & the pending investigation. Instead, the state only relied on the inadmissible legal blood in order to obtain the medical blood. The state did not depend on any legally recognized evidence which established any link between defendant's medical blood and the accident investigation. The State presentedno police reports, arrest affidavits, or other documents to the circuit court. The District Court of Appeal additionally stated the State of Florida's theory, that a collision with a death always makes medical blood relevant, wasn't the law and has been held to create only part of the basis to establish relevance. The appellate court ruled that, even though the State of Florida appropriately contended it could rely upon the probable cause affidavit & argument to show relevance, there was no evidence that the state actually relied upon the probable cause affidavit during the hearing on the defendant's objection to the issuance of the subpoena. The 4th District Court of Appeal reversed the circuit court's ruling denying the suppression of the medical blood since the state didn't establish a connection between the medical blood & the crash. The appellate court directed that, on remand, the state wouldn't be prohibited from again seeking medical records through a subpoena if it proffered evidence which tended to demonstrate the relevance of medical blood evidence, for the reason that State of Florida's actions did not rise to the level of bad faith. For more information on Miami DUI Attorney Miami FL , please visit our website Criminal Attorney Miami FL or you can contact us at: The Law Offices of Rosenberg and Dye 201 South Biscayne Boulevard 28th Floor Miami, FL 33131 (305)429-3285
Related Articles -
Florida DUI Attorney, Florida Criminal Attorney,
| 
