cannabisnews.com: Judge Upholds Privacy for Jeb Bush's Daughter





Judge Upholds Privacy for Jeb Bush's Daughter
Posted by CN Staff on October 01, 2002 at 09:21:36 PT
By Dana Canedy
Source: New York Times 
A judge ruled today that staff members at a drug rehabilitation center in Orlando, where Gov. Jeb Bush's daughter, Noelle, is receiving treatment, cannot be forced to cooperate with an investigation into an accusation that she had possessed crack cocaine.Chief Judge Belvin Perry Jr. of Circuit Court of Orange County in Orlando wrote in his ruling that patient privacy outweighed law enforcement interests in cases in which addicts relapse in treatment.
Forcing the institution, the Center for Drug-Free Living, to aid in the investigation would mean that "all patients who suffer relapses could be hauled out of treatment programs and into criminal courts on the whim of a state prosecutor or police officer responding to calls from fellow patients whose motives for reporting the `crimes' might be questionable," Judge Perry wrote. His ruling cited federal and state laws that protect patients' privacy rights.Ms. Bush, 25, the governor's only daughter, has been in court-ordered rehabilitation since February, shortly after being charged with prescription fraud. In January, Ms. Bush tried to obtain an anti-anxiety drug, Xanax, from a pharmacy in Tallahassee with a prescription that the police said she had written for herself.In July, a judge found her in contempt of court and sent her to jail for 72 hours, after staff members at her resident drug-treatment center had found prescription pills in her possession that a nurse said had been stolen from the center's medicine cabinet. Ms. Bush said she had found the pills on the center's grounds, but administrators there called her explanation a fabrication.In the latest incident, a fellow patient at the treatment center told the police on Sept. 9 that Ms. Bush had been found with crack cocaine in her shoe and suggested that she was receiving special treatment because of her family connections. President Bush is her uncle.Supervisors and employees at the center refused to cooperate with the authorities in the investigation, contending that patient confidentiality, and not Ms. Bush's celebrity, prohibited them from providing statements and evidence.Seeking to force cooperation, the Orange County state attorney's office issued subpoenas to four employees at the center and argued in court that prosecutors had a duty to investigate all reports of criminal activity and that failing to compel employees' testimony would amount to granting drug patients the license to commit drug offenses, protected by blanket immunity.Lawyers for the center argued that state and federal law upheld the right to privacy related to rehabilitation. Judge Perry agreed."If drug-addicted patients could be taken by the police and delivered to regular criminal court for the crime of possession of drugs, the treatment-based intervention program would be rendered meaningless," he wrote.The state attorney's office said it would appeal the ruling. Ms. Bush's lawyer, Peter Antonacci, did not return calls for comment. Mr. Bush's office also did not return calls.Mr. Bush, a Republican, has acknowledged his daughter's problems with substance abuse on several occasions, calling it a difficult family matter. The subject has not emerged as an issue in his campaign for re-election in November. Legal experts and drug-treatment centers across the country had been closely watching the case because of its possible implications not just for Ms. Bush, but also as it relates to broader patient privacy."There is not simply the private interest of a single patient to be considered," said Kate O'Neill, a lawyer for the Legal Action Center, an advocacy organization that specializes in drug issues and has been monitoring the Bush case. "Treatment providers need real assurances that their privacy will be protected. People who need treatment will be afraid to seek treatment if disclosure of that information is done. It is counterproductive and also damaging to society's interest."An assistant state attorney for Orange County, Jeff Ashton, said that his office disagreed that privacy laws applied to the case and that it would appeal Judge Perry's ruling to the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Daytona Beach. "We respectfully disagree with the court's ruling," Mr. Ashton said. Keeping a treatment program private is "all well and good, but it shouldn't be a license to commit crimes with immunity." Mr. Ashton said the police wanted to investigate whether someone had sold crack cocaine to a patient or an employee at the center. He criticized the ruling's saying the incident was not a new crime but part of Ms. Bush's original drug case."I don't know where the court gets this from," Mr. Ashton said. "It clearly is a new crime. No question about it."Carlos Burruezo, chairman of the board of the Center for Drug-Free Living and its lawyer, said the decision was "well reasoned, good and within the requirements of the law".Mr. Burruezo said there had been circumstances in which rehabilitation centers had called the police to retrieve illegal drugs found in a patient's possession. But there is "never a revelation about the person who had it," Mr. Burruezo said. "The unusual wrinkle in this case," he added, "was that police wanted to initiate a whole new proceeding based on allegations it received, which is just not the norm."Source: New York Times (NY)Author: Dana CanedyPublished: October 1, 2002Copyright: 2002 The New York Times Company Contact: letters nytimes.com Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Related Articles:Employees of Drug Center Can Remain Silent http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14309.shtmlRehab Centers Monitor Bush Case http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14301.shtmlNoelle Bush Case Sparks Legal Testhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14213.shtmlA Crack House Divided - Arianna Huffingtonhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14127.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #8 posted by Jerr-man on October 01, 2002 at 21:04:09 PT
Who shot Carla?
Noelle,it is time to focus on your recovery ,humor is considered important in many programs.One example, for fun of course, you could tell daddy's lawyers to file charges against the rehab center for the crackrock to be returned to you.Publicly (couple cameras present) asking your uncle gw why he is allowing the continual attack on medical cannabis users and suppliers would be another example.
Being WLDTC (#1) is full, would like AA meetings be considered a rehab center. Noelle ,Please take my hand ,and don't listen to freedybigbee's (#5) ideas,he is trying to hurt you,I'm here to help you.We will market in-home-rehab-kits with your likeness on the package.Meantime we could grow a forest of sticky stuff as part of our rehab (wink..wink..fbb )at home.
j-m
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by VitaminT on October 01, 2002 at 11:50:27 PT
Maybe they should have called the DEA
The DEA doesn't care about doctor-patient confidentiality since they seize paitent records as a matter of routine in their terrorist raids in California.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by canaman on October 01, 2002 at 11:25:17 PT
Noelle Bush...poster woman for ONDCP
Attention: Compassionate ConservativesYou're son's and daughters are in good hands. As long as they are princes and princesses of the new faux royalty.Not a member of the new faux royalty? Not to worry as long as you have lots of money too hire one of our attorneys and see one of our judges. Don't have lots of money? Then you're out of luck, go see those bleeding heart liberals.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by freddybigbee on October 01, 2002 at 10:49:21 PT:
Opportunity knocks
It occurs to me, after reading about the young Bush girl and our suddenly compassionate courts, that there is an opportunity here. If Noelle were to grow a couple hundred marijuana plants (after she gets out of treatment or whatever...) and sell a lot of it and get busted for cultivation and dealing; why then the courts would probably declare that these were perfectly legal acts, that the prohibition is unconstitutional, etc. etc. All it would take is the right person getting busted to make all the non-sense go away.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by malleus on October 01, 2002 at 10:40:35 PT
Some animals ARE more equal than others
I thought the whole idea, as explained by countless cops and prosecutors, was that they needed to hold the threat of jail over an addicts' head to make someone in 'treatment' toe the line and finish the program. Step out of line, and The Man comes to 'take you away'. (How do you treat for poverty? Neglect? Physical and/or emotional abuse? The major, core components as to why some people feel the need to seek solace in chemicals?) It also serves as an 'example' to others thinking about doing the same thing. Or so they keep telling us.Obviously, in Noelle Bush's case, that whole rationale has just been proven false. You can commit any felony you like, so long as you are a Bush. Harry Orwell must be laughing his butt off.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by AlvinCool on October 01, 2002 at 10:17:12 PT
Prison and rehab
So if a person uses narcotics in rehab it's ok and normal. But if a person receives prison instead of rehab, should that not still apply?Hence any person cought in prison with drugs, that was put in prison for drugs, is simply acting normal and additional charges should not apply. I believe this ruling sets presidence for this type of appeal for additional sentences placed on indivuals in incaration that are found in possesion of drugs, doesn't it? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by krutch on October 01, 2002 at 10:06:24 PT:
So it is legal to possess crack
As long as you are in treatment. Your privacy rights outweigh the criminal aspects of possessing the drug and matter is treated as a medical problem rather than a criminal problem. Is this not what we reformers have been saying we should do all along. I find it strange that ones first drug offense is treated as a crime, but any subsequent offenses are treated as a medical problem, providing you are in treatment at the time.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by WolfgangWylde on October 01, 2002 at 10:03:29 PT
Cool....
...felony drug possession is legal as long as you are in rehab. I now declare myself the sole resident at the Wolfie Land Drug Treatment Center, all Pigs please back off from now on.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment