Timothy P. Savage v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledAugust 3, 2026
Docket6D2026-1612
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 6D2026-1612
Lower Tribunal No. 2026-MS-000144
_____________________________
TIMOTHY P. SAVAGE,
Petitioner,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
_____________________________
Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the County Court for Collier County.
Deborah Cunningham, Judge.
August 3, 2026
PER CURIAM.
PETITION DENIED. Compare Roberts v. State, 405 So. 3d 383, 385 (Fla.
6th DCA 2023) (“The order granting the [State’s motion seeking leave of court to
subpoena medical records] authorized the State to subpoena [the petitioner’s]
medical records. Those records are protected by sections 395.3025 and 401.30,
Florida Statutes. [The petitioner] has established irreparable harm because a
violation of either statute causes an immediate injury that cannot be remedied on
appeal. We now turn to the issue of whether the trial court departed from the essential
requirements of the law. To obtain a subpoena for medical records, the State must
present argument and evidence showing a nexus between those records and the
criminal investigation. At the hearing on the Motion, the State presented no
evidence. We reject the State’s contention that making argument at the hearing that
referred to the [signed but unsworn] Motion and the [unsigned and unsworn]
Attachments [thereto that were allegedly prepared by deputy sheriffs related to the
DUI case] satisfied its obligation to present evidence. Therefore, [the petitioner] has
demonstrated a departure from the essential requirements of the law. For all the
foregoing reasons, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari and quash the trial
court’s order granting the Motion.” (citations omitted)), with McKnight v. State, 335
So. 3d 190, 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (“When the State seeks a subpoena for medical
records, the court can rely on the State’s argument and the accident report or
probable cause affidavit to establish relevance.” (citation omitted)), and State v.
Tavenese, 321 So. 3d 252, 255 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“Moreover, when the State
seeks a subpoena for medical records, the court can rely on the State’s argument and
the accident report or probable cause affidavit to establish relevance.” (brackets,
internal quotation marks, and citation omitted)), and Leka v. State, 283 So. 3d 853,
859 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (“In considering the request for a subpoena for medical
records, the court can rely on the State’s argument and the accident report or
probable cause affidavit to establish relevance.” (citations and internal quotation
2
marks omitted)). See generally CPPB, LLC v. Taurus Apopka City Ctr., LLC, 375
So. 3d 327, 329 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023) (“Appellate courts may grant a petition for
certiorari only when the petitioner establishes (1) a departure from the essential
requirements of the law, (2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the case
(3) that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal.” (citation and internal quotation
marks omitted)); Regala v. McDonald, 374 So. 3d 855, 858 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023)
(“Because the second and third elements, which are jointly referenced as ‘irreparable
harm,’ are jurisdictional, they must be established before the first element, i.e., the
merits, may be addressed.”).
MIZE, GANNAM and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Christopher E. Cosden, Fort Myers, for Petitioner.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Respondent.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
3