JOY FRIEDRICH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1999-09-17
No. 98-0891
DELL and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
743 So. 2d 1125 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1999)

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.

Synopsis

Joy Friedrich was convicted of DUI-manslaughter and DUI-serious bodily injury. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed her convictions and sentences, upholding the trial court's admission of blood test results obtained during medical treatment at a hospital under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, while certifying a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether this exception applies in criminal prosecutions.


Holding

The trial court properly admitted the medical blood test results under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Once the proponent meets the traditional business records requirements, the burden shifts to the opponent to prove untrustworthiness, and a presumption of trustworthiness exists for medical records. However, the court certified a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether Love v. Garcia applies in criminal cases where blood alcohol tests administered by hospital personnel for medical treatment purposes are offered to establish an element of the offense.


Headnotes

[1] Medical records may be admitted as business records in criminal prosecutions if they meet the traditional requirements for a business record, are relevant, and not unfair…

[2] A presumption of trustworthiness exists for medical records offered as business records.

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

Key Quotes

“medical records can be admitted as business records provided the records meet the traditional requirements for a business record, are relevant, and not unfairly prejudicial”

Establishes the three-part test for admitting medical records as business records exception to hearsay

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A police officer requested a blood sample from the defendant at the scene of a car accident in which a passenger was killed. Due to the defendant's in…

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.


Opinion of the Court
GUNTHER, J.

GUNTHER, J.

The defendant appeals her convictions and sentences for DUI-manslaughter and DUI-serious bodily injury. We affirm in all respects, but comment on the admissibility of medical blood test results as a business records exception to the hearsay rule.

Upon arriving at the scene of the accident in which the defendant collided with another vehicle whose passenger was killed, a police officer requested a blood sample be drawn from the defendant. However, the defendant’s injuries required medical treatment at a hospital, and the sample was not taken when requested. While at the' hospital, blood' was taken for medical purposes. It is the admission of test results from this medical blood which is at issue on appeal.

On appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred in admitting the test results from the medical blood because the State did not comply with furnishing the proper predicate, i.e., a qualified technician, a reliable test, and the meaning of the test results. The State responds the test results were properly admitted under the business records exception. We agree.

The Florida Supreme Court first recognized the admissibility of medical records as a business record in the civil case, Love v. Garcia, 634 So. 2d 158 (Fla.1994). In Love, the court concluded that medical records can be admitted as business records provided the records meet the traditional requirements for a business record, are relevant, and not unfairly prejudicial. See id. at 160. Once the party proponent meets these requirements, the burden shifts to the party opponent to prove un-trustworthiness. See id. Furthermore, the court stated that a presumption of trustworthiness exists in regard to medical records. See id.

More recently, in Baber v. State, 24 Fla.L. Weekly D1478, 738 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), we concluded that Love applies to criminal cases, but certified a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court. See id. at D1478-79, id. at 380-81. We stated in Baber that we were “reasonably confident” Love applies to criminal cases; however, this is an issue best left for the Florida Supreme Court. See id. at D1479, id at 381. Because we have concerns about applying the principles set forth in Love, a civil case, to prove an element of a criminal offense, we again certify the following question as one of great public importance:

DOES LOVE V. GARCIA, 634 So. 2d 158 (Fla.1994), APPLY IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS WHERE BLOOD ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS ARE OFFERED AS PROOF TO ESTABLISH AN ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE, IF THE BLOOD ALCOHOL TESTS WERE ADMINISTERED BY HOSPITAL PERSONNEL FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT PURPOSES?

Id. Until the Florida Supreme Court addresses this issue, we conclude, based on Love and Baber, that the trial court properly admitted the medical records under the business records exception in the present case. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s convictions and sentences.

AFFIRMED.

DELL and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw