To: Mr. Brandon S. Craig – Attorney at Law
From: Mr. Frank Paul Jones – Certified Paralegal
RE: Confidentiality of Medical Records and Dismissal of both cases
Date: 31 March 2012
The DUI Try By: Capstone Zulu Feat Stackz Gotti
Smooth Gangster By: Capstone Zulu
Disclosure of (PHI) Public Health Information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and Florida
Mandatory Disclosures consist of:
Gunshot Wounds and Life-Threatening Injuries
Suspected Child Abuse
Suspected Vulnerable Adult Abuse
Public Health Surveillance
I do not fall under mandatory disclosure:
The subpoena duces tecum is similar to the subpoena ad testificandum, which is a writ summoning a witness to testify orally. However, unlike the latter summons, the subpoena duces tecum instructs the witness to bring in hand books, papers, or evidence for the court. In most jurisdictions, a subpoena usually has to be served personally
Attorney Client Privilege – Insures confidentiality – cannot discuss my case – cannot testify against me.
Attorney-client privilege is generally recognized by the courts. Communications between lawyer and client are generally immune from subpoena
Physician–patient privilege – Insures Confidentiality- cannot discuss my medical and psychiatric records. Physician-patient privilege is usually statutorily defined, and can vary from state to state. The usual rule is that medical records are immune from subpoena if the plaintiff has not alleged physical or mental injuries or damages.
You cannot force my psychiatrist to testify against me to gain a conviction, however she would make a good character witness during sentencing to recommend sentencing or a proponent for competency restoration.
There is not mandatory disclosure in this case and attorney client and physician-patient privilege clearly states my communications with my attorney is confidential and not subject to subpoena and my communications with my physician in this case with the lack of alleged mental or physical injuries or damages under non mandatory disclosure, does not meet the qualifications to subpoena my Federal Medical Records, to support a criminal investigation.
DUI – 1st Offense: Case Number 10-000670-TT-MA
1: My BAC was 0.066
2: The traffic infraction was thrown out of court for making an illegal turn
3: There was no video support during the alleged failed sobriety test.
4: There was no evidence of any use of other chemicals that night, there was no blood test.
5: I was arrested 1Aug 2010 and found to be incompetent to proceed on 21 July 2011.
6: I cannot be tried unless my competency is restored which is an $8G process and the case is weak.
I request that this case be dismissed at the 7 June 2012 hearing, due to the fact that I did not have a BAC of 0.08 or above, there is no evidence of chemical use other than alcohol which was in the legal limits. There was no mention of video support in the discovery and this has been confirmed at the Sebring, FL Police Department. Furthermore, I was found incompetent to proceed almost one year from the date of the next hearing on 7 June 2012. fs. 316.193
Battery – Domestic Violence: Case Number 11-001102-MM-MA
1: I was found incompetent to proceed on 12 February 2012
2: The alleged victim testified in court that there was no domestic violence committed against her by me.
3: The only alleged witness was a 10 year old child and though there is no law prohibiting a police officer from questioning a child, a parent has the right to not allow her child to speak to a police officer, the alleged victim did not have to option as the police used illegal tactics to gain inadmissible statements from a child.
#4: The child who is under 15 years of age cannot be forced to testify in court, without parental consent, because he cannot be subpoenaed in the state of Florida under the age of 15. fs. 48.031
There are no evidence to support the charges; the alleged victim requested I not be tried in court at the state attorney office.
There were no bruises or scars on the alleged victim or hospital records, to support the SA in pursuing this case any further.
The case should be dismissed on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to that this case to trial. However, if the dismissal is not granted, I request that my competency be restored and after the restoration process, I would like to be tried by a jury of my peers.
Frank Paul Jones