In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425
Docket: No. SC11-2142
Court: Supreme Court of Florida; July 12, 2012; Florida; State Supreme Court
The Criminal Procedure Rules Committee, the Rules of Judicial Administration Committee, and the Traffic Court Rules Committee submitted a joint report proposing amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425 regarding the minimization of sensitive information filings. This initiative arose from the Court’s request to create rules similar to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1, specifically addressing the filing of sensitive personal information in criminal and traffic cases. The Court initially adopted a broad exemption for such filings, based on input from various stakeholders, but later sought a more tailored approach due to the significant presence of personal information in these filings. The proposed amendments to subdivision (b)(8) of rule 2.425 delineate specific document types in criminal and traffic cases that are exempt from the general minimization requirements. The amendments reflect a structure aligned with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(b), incorporating certain exemptions while also introducing new categories not found in the federal rule. The Florida Bar Board of Governors endorsed these amendments, which were published for public comment. Following the review of one comment and the committees' response, the Court adopted the amendments. The Court has mandated the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee to assess the application of the revised subdivision and report back by April 1, 2014, with recommendations on potentially narrowing the exemptions further. The amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.425 are effective immediately upon the release of this opinion. Rule 2.425 addresses the minimization of sensitive information filings, specifying that certain exceptions apply. Specifically, subdivision (b) outlines exemptions, including: 1. Pro se filings (b)(8)(A). 2. Filings related to criminal matters or investigations prepared prior to formal charges or not part of a docketed case (b)(8)(B). 3. Arrest or search warrants and related supporting information (b)(8)(C). 4. Charging documents and supporting affidavits, including driving records (b)(8)(D). 5. Statements of particulars (b)(8)(E). 6. Discovery materials introduced as evidence or filed with the court (b)(8)(F). 7. Information necessary for issuing and executing a subpoena duces tecum (b)(8)(G). Concerns raised by the Criminal Procedure Rules Committee and criminal justice organizations include the potential burden on prosecutors if extensive information in documents like arrest affidavits and police reports must be redacted, as it could significantly increase their workload. The rule is designed to balance the need for confidentiality with the operational needs of the criminal justice system.