State v. Wright, 59 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). · Go Syfert
State v. Wright, 59 So. 3d 263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: State v. Sun (fladistctapp, 2011-06-01)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Sun (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
As we recently held in State v. Wright, “the deputy’s obtaining of the pharmacy records was authorized by section 893.07(4), Florida Statutes (2009), and ... the statute does not violate Article I, Section 23 of the Florida Constitution.” 59 So.3d at 263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (citing Hendley v. State, 58 So.3d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011); State v. Yutzy, 43 So.3d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); State v. Tamulonis, 39 So.3d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); State v. Carter, 23 So.3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Florida
v.
Jessica WRIGHT
No. 4D09-4462.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Apr 6, 2011.
59 So. 3d 263
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Melynda L. Melear, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant., Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Narine N. Austin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Gerber, Gross, Stevenson.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Jessica Wright was charged with withholding information from a medical practitioner in violation of subsections 893.13(7)(a)8. and 9., Florida Statutes (2009). Wright moved to suppress evidence secured by a deputy who had received an anonymous tip that Wright was doctor shopping. The deputy went to several pharmacies and obtained records that allowed him to determine that Wright had obtained the same controlled substances from two doctors within 30 days. Based on this information, the deputy contacted the two doctors and learned that Wright had not disclosed to either doctor that she had received a prescription from the other. The trial court granted Wright’s motion to suppress.

We agree with the analysis of our sister courts that the deputy’s obtaining of the pharmacy records was authorized by section 893.07(4), Florida Statutes (2009), and that the statute does not violate Article I, Section 23 of the Florida Constitution. See State v. Carter, 23 So.3d 798 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); State v. Tamulonis, 39 So.3d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); State v. Yutzy, 43 So.3d 910 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Hendley v. State, 58 So.3d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). We therefore reverse the order as it applies to the pharmacy records. On re[*264] mand the circuit court may hold further hearings and consider whether or not the information obtained from the physicians violated section 456.057, Florida Statutes (2009). See State v. Herc, — So.3d -, 2011 WL 116001 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011); State v. Shukitis, 60 So.3d 406, 2010 WL 4365761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).

Reversed and remanded.

GROSS, C.J., STEVENSON and GERBER, JJ., concur.