The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLIV
CIVIL RIGHTS

Chapter 760
DISCRIMINATION IN THE TREATMENT OF PERSONS; MINORITY REPRESENTATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 760.40

760.40 Genetic testing; definitions; express consent required; confidentiality; notice of use of results.—

(1) As used in this section, the term:

(a) “DNA analysis” means the medical and biological examination and analysis of a person’s DNA to identify the presence and composition of genes in that person’s body. The term includes DNA typing and genetic testing.

(b) “DNA sample” means any human biological specimen from which DNA can be extracted or the DNA extracted from such specimen.

(c) “Exclusive property” means the right of the person whose DNA has been extracted or analyzed to exercise control over his or her DNA sample and any results of his or her DNA analysis with regard to the collection, use, retention, maintenance, disclosure, or destruction of such sample or analysis results.

(d) “Express consent” means authorization by the person whose DNA is to be extracted or analyzed, or such person’s legal guardian or authorized representative, evidenced by an affirmative action demonstrating an intentional decision, after the person receives a clear and prominent disclosure regarding the manner of collection, use, retention, maintenance, or disclosure of a DNA sample or results of a DNA analysis for specified purposes. A single express consent may authorize every instance of a specified purpose or use.

(2) Except as provided in s. 817.5655, a person or entity may only perform DNA analysis with express consent. The results of such DNA analysis, whether held by a public or private entity, are the exclusive property of the person tested, are confidential, and may not be disclosed without express consent. Such information held by a public entity is exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.

(3) A person who performs DNA analysis or receives records, results, or findings of DNA analysis must provide the person tested with notice that the analysis was performed or that the information was received. The notice must state that, upon the request of the person tested, the information will be made available to his or her physician. The notice must also state whether the information was used in any decision to grant or deny any insurance, employment, mortgage, loan, credit, or educational opportunity. If the information was used in any decision that resulted in a denial, the analysis must be repeated to verify the accuracy of the first analysis, and if the first analysis is found to be inaccurate, the denial must be reviewed.

History.—s. 1, ch. 92-101; s. 10, ch. 93-204; s. 1, ch. 94-90; s. 420, ch. 96-406; s. 1795, ch. 97-102; s. 15, ch. 98-251; s. 7, ch. 2001-127; s. 40, ch. 2005-39; s. 3, ch. 2009-190; s. 2, ch. 2021-216.

F.S. 760.40 on Google Scholar

F.S. 760.40 on Casetext

Amendments to 760.40

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 760.40

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S760.40 - INVADE PRIVACY - RENUMBERED. SEE REC # 9467 - M: F

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

DOUBERLEY, v. PERLMUTTER,, 219 So. 3d 854 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . The defendants argued that the crime-fraud exception applied because section 760.40, Florida Statutes . . . guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082. or s. 775.083.” § 760.40 . . . first analysis, and if the first analysis is found to be inaccurate, the denial must be reviewed. § 760.40 . . .

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES PROJECT, v. SPV REALTY, LC,, 212 So. 3d 419 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Chapter 760 also includes a genetic testing privacy law, section 760.40, a provision empowering the Attorney . . .

STATE v. L. CEASAR, Jr., 188 So. 3d 989 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 760.40(2)(a), Fla. Stat. . . .

STATE v. GIBSON,, 150 So. 3d 1240 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . A separate statute, section 760.40, Florida Statutes (2012), the “DNA Database Act,” regulates the performance . . .

W. DOE, III v. SUNTRUST BANK, W. Jr. W. Jr. a a, 32 So. 3d 133 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . by ordering Adrian and Evelyn to submit to DNA testing as part of the discovery process when section 760.40 . . . Because I believe that the circuit court was bound by the limitations in section 760.40, I would answer . . . However, section 760.40 imposes limitations on the court’s authority to order such DNA testing. . . . Section 760.40 is entitled “Genetic testing; informed consent; confidentiality; penalties; notice of . . . The privacy right protected by section 760.40(2)(a) is not just the right to be free from unwarranted . . . Additionally, the Does argued that section 760.40, Florida Statutes (2005), prohibits the court from . . . See § 760.40(2)(b). . . . See § 760.40(2)(a). . . . See § 760.40(3). . . . On its face, section 760.40 is silent regarding when DNA testing may be ordered. . . .

GREENBERG, v. MIAMI CHILDREN S HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. s d b a s, 264 F. Supp. 2d 1064 (S.D. Fla. 2003)

. . . Florida Statute § 760.40 does require, however, that a person’s informed consent must be obtained when . . . Stat. § 760.40 (2002). . . .

In E. HASKELL,, 252 B.R. 236 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2000)

. . . John Holland filed a late claim in the amount of $99,-760.40. (Claim No. 31.) . . .

TRI- STATE BUSINESS MACHINES, INC. v. LANIER WORLDWIDE, INC., 221 F.3d 1015 (7th Cir. 2000)

. . . the arbitration panel ordered Lanier to pay Tri-State overdue service payments in the amount of $41,-760.40 . . .

UNITED STATES v. ISMAIL, UNITED STATES v. AHMAD, a k a UNITED STATES v. AHMED, a k a UNITED STATES v. BASHIR,, 97 F.3d 50 (4th Cir. 1996)

. . . understated its tax liability by $186,302.31, and the 1992 return understated its tax liability by $188,-760.40 . . .

In OLD ELECTRALLOY CORPORATION f k a f d b a W. ROEDER, v. UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,, 167 B.R. 786 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 1994)

. . . Claim number 828 was filed August 26, 1991, asserting an administrative claim in the amount of $760.40 . . . Claim No. 828 represents a postpetition administrative claim in the amount of $760.40 on behalf of several . . . Claim No. 828 is allowed as a § 503 administrative claim in the amount of $760.40. 3. . . .