1. Marsy’s Law in Florida provides crime victims with the constitutional right to privacy regarding records that could be used to locate or harass them or disclose confidential information.
2. There were ambiguities and uncertainties in the law, including whether on-duty law enforcement officers could invoke the privacy protections if they were crime victims.
3. The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that Marsy’s Law does not shield on-duty law enforcement officers or any other crime victims from disclosure.
4. The Court clarified that the decision does not prevent the Florida legislature from expanding victim confidentiality in the future, and it only applies to the interpretation of Marsy’s Law, not other victim privacy protections in Florida statutes. 1. The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that the identities of crime victims, including law enforcement officers, are not protected by Marsy’s Law’s privacy protections.
2. The decision impacts how law enforcement and other agencies handle the names of crime victims in response to public records requests.
3. Critics may argue that the decision goes against Marsy’s Law’s intent to protect crime victims from harassment and dissemination of confidential information, but the Court relied on sound interpretation of other provisions of Florida’s Constitution and existing statutory exemptions.
4. The Court addressed the issue of how the disclosure of a victim’s identity could be used to locate or harass them. 1. Marsy’s Law does not guarantee victims the right to withhold their name from disclosure.
2. The Amendment only provides for the confidentiality of information that could lead to the location of the victim.
3. The Court found that a victim’s name, standing alone, does not communicate anything about where the individual can be found and bothered.
4. Other provisions of the Florida Constitution specifically provide confidentiality of a person’s identity.
5. The Court reasoned that there is a meaningful distinction between protecting crime victims from being located versus being identified. 1. The Florida Police Benevolent Association and victim advocacy groups may seek recourse in the Florida Legislature to expand statutory exemptions for crime victim confidentiality.
2. The legislative battle may revolve around whether on-duty law enforcement officers should be permitted to invoke crime victim privacy protections.
3. The Supreme Court’s decision emphasizes that victim confidentiality is determined by the Legislature, not Marsy’s Law.
4. Until the Legislature expands Florida’s public records laws, the identities of all crime victims, including on-duty officers, are not protected by Marsy’s Law.
5. Public records departments should review the decision and implement response measures consistent with its holding to avoid liability under Florida’s public records laws.
https://www.rumberger.com/insights/florida-supreme-court-provides-dispositive-guidance-on-marsys-law-the-identities-of-crime-victims-are-not-protected-from-disclosure/
Leave a Reply