NESTOR GARCIA, M.D., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Dr. Garcia appealed an emergency suspension of his medical license by the Department of Professional Regulation. The court upheld the suspension, finding that the statutory procedure was constitutional and that the Secretary's findings adequately established immediate danger to the public.
The court affirmed the emergency suspension order, rejecting Garcia's constitutional challenge. The statute is facially constitutional, and the review procedures and rules provide sufficient due process protection while allowing the Secretary to establish immediate danger to the public.
[1] An emergency suspension of a medical license is constitutional when supported by findings establishing an immediate danger to the public.
[2] Due process is afforded when statutory and rule provisions provide sufficient review of an emergency license suspension order.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Garcia was, and apparently is still, addicted to Demerol. He voluntarily entered a treatment program, where he refuses to acknowledge his problem, preferring to treat himself.”
Establishes Garcia's substance abuse and non-compliance with treatment, foundational to the emergency suspension rationale.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGarcia, a practicing psychiatrist, was addicted to Demerol and refused to acknowledge his addiction or participate meaningfully in treatment. He seduc…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
BARKDULL, Judge.
By this appeal the appellant, Garcia, seeks review of an order of the Secretary of the Department of Professional Regulation, which on an emergency basis suspended Garcia’s license to practice medicine.1
Garcia was, and apparently is still, addicted to Demerol. He voluntarily entered a treatment program, where he refuses to acknowledge his problem, preferring to treat himself. It came to light that Garcia, a practicing psychiatrist, had seduced a minor patient under his care, and aided the minor in her escape from the Psychiatric unit of Memorial Hospital in Hollywood, and that he took the minor to a motel and injected himself and the minor with Demerol. Garcia was examined by two doctors, one of whom recommended a long term chemical dependency program for outpatient treatment. The other said, that based on his examination it would be unsafe, in fact, dangerous for Garcia to continue to practice medicine. Based on this, the Secretary of the Department of Professional Regulation entered the emergency license suspension herein appealed.
The appellant contends that Section 120.-60(8), Florida Statutes (1988), is unconstitutional, that the provisions for review of the emergency suspension order and procedures for a formal hearing on the administrative complaint are inadequate, because of the length of time involved, thereby depriving him of due process, and therefore, the emergency suspension order is facially invalid.
The appellee contends that Section 120.60(8), Florida Statutes (1988), is constitutional on its face and that the statutes and Rules provide the appellant with sufficient review of the emergency suspension order to afford him due process, and that the findings of the Secretary are sufficient to establish an immediate danger to the public.
We agree. See and compare Major v. Department of Professional Regulation, Bd. of Medicine, 531 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Grantham v. Gunter, 498 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Saviak v. Gunter, 375 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Tauber v. State, Bd. of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, 362 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).
Therefore the order under review is affirmed.
Affirmed.
. We have jurisdiction. See Gervais v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, 438 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983); Aurora Enterprises, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Business Regulation, 395 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1981); Section 120.68, Florida Statutes (1989); Rule 9.100 (a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bio-Med Plus, Inc. v. State, 915 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…pursuant to section 120.68(1), Florida Statutes, and rule 9.100(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Commercial Consultants Corp. v. Dep’t of Bus. Regulation, 363 So. 2d 1162, 1165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Garcia v. Dep’t of Prof'l Regulation, 581 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). This court has previously granted Bio-Med’s emergency motion for stay of the ESO pending final disposition of this proceeding. . Section 499.006(10), Florida Statutes (2004), provides that a drag is adulterated if it "has been p…
-
Steven A. Field, M.D. v. State, 902 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…nsion order sets forth sufficient detailed and explicit facts to amply demonstrate that Dr. Field’s continued medical practice would pose an immediate and serious danger to public health, safety and welfare. See Garcia v. Dep’t of Prof'l Regulation, 581 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)(emergency suspension order was upheld where a practicing psychiatrist had seduced a minor patient under his care and aided the minor in her escape from a psychiatric hospital injecting both himself and the minor with Demerol after…
Authorities Cited
- Saviak v. Gunter, 375 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- Aurora Enters., Inc. v. State, 395 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Tauber v. The State Bd. OF Osteopathic Med. Exam'rs, 362 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Gervais v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, 438 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Grantham v. Gunter, 498 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- Lyons v. State, 531 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)