Opinion

John Goodman v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement

  • 203 So. 3d 909
  • 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7961
  • 2016 WL 3002178
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
May 25, 2016
Status
Published
On the bench
Warner, Stevenson, Forst, Gerber
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.1%

calling Goodman's position "an overbroad solution in search of a problem"

How later courts described this case

  • calling Goodman's position "an overbroad solution in search of a problem"

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

*916

On Motion fob Rehearing and Certification of Questions of Great Public Importance

PER CURIAM.

We deny Appellant’s motion for rehearing. We grant Appellant’s June 28, 2016 Motion for Certification of Questions of Great Public Importance and certify thé following questions to the Florida. Supreme Court:

(1) ARE THE CURRENT RULES OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT (FDLE) INADEQUATE UNDER STATE v. MILES, 775 So.2d 950 (Fla.2000), FOR PURPORTEDLY FAILING TO SUFFICIENTLY REGULATE PROPER BLOOD DRAW PROCEDURES, AS WELL AS THE HOMOGENIZATION PROCESS TO “CURE” A CLOTTED BLOOD SAMPLE?

(2) ARE THE PRESENT RULES SIMILARLY INADEQUATE FOR FAILING TO SPECIFICALLY REGULATE THE WORK OF ANALYSTS IN SCREENING BLOOD SAMPLES, DOCUMENTING IRREGULARITIES, AND REJECTING UNFIT SAMPLES?

WARNER and FORST, JJ., concur.

GERBER, J., concurs with the denial of the motion for rehearing, and dissents from the granting of the motion for certification of questions of great public importance.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.