Isom v. State, 722 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Cases | Isom v. State, 722 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) | 2018

The defendant was charged with various sexual offenses. On appeal, the defendant “seeks ceretiorari review of the trial court’s order requiring him to submit to HIV testing” and made three arguments, including: 1) his offenses allegedly occurred more than eighteen months before the HIV testing was sought and this defeats the purpose of the statute; and 2) “there was no medical or other testimony demonstrating a compelling reason why the victim could not protect her health by having her own blood tested or that a positive result on him would result in useful information to her regarding the date she accused him of having sexual contact with her.” The court of appeals held that: 1) not only was his alleged offense not “so long ago,” but the statute imposes no such time limit; and 2) the statute also does not require the court of make any findings of a compelling reason why the victim could not protect her health by having her own blood tested. Certiorari was denied.