Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Albritton

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 2, 2011No. 2D09-5091Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAltenbernd, Judge

I recognize that the court’s opinion in this case is in full accord with a significant body of case law from more than one district.2 But I also recognize that the *896citizens of this state created an express constitutional right of privacy in 1980. See art. I, § 23, Fla. Const. Although prescription drug abuse is a serious and deadly problem requiring a strong response from the State, I am not convinced that it is constitutional to interpret section 893.07(4), Florida Statutes (2007 & 2008), to authorize a deputy sheriff, without any reasonable suspicion, to send a “blast-fax” to every pharmacy…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Whalen v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Winfield v. Div. of Pari-Mutuel WageringSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
  4. Stone v. City of StowOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  5. State v. CarterDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API