Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, specifically Release of Medical Records — USA v. Edwards et al. (Dkt. 41, M.D. Fla.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida · No. 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP · Doc. 41 · 2022-12-28 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
ORLANDO DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO. 6:22-cr-00201-WWB-LHP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EVAN EDWARDS 
   a/k/a Ian Heringa 
 
 
JOINT MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE RELEASE OF 
DEFENDANT’S MEDICAL RECORDS 
 
 
The United States of America by Roger B. Handberg, United States Attorney 
for the Middle District of Florida, and A. Brian Phillips, counsel for defendant, Evan 
Edwards, a/k/a Ian Heringa, hereby move the Court for entry of an order directing 
the defendant’s medical provider, Orlando Regional Medical Center and its employees 
and/or agents (together, the “Medical Provider”) to release the defendant’s medical 
records forthwith, and states in support as follows:  
I. 
Relevant Procedural Background 
1. 
On December 7, 2022, the defendant was charged with violation of 
conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud, and visa fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 
§ § 1344, 1349, and 1546, respectively. Doc. 1.  
2. 
On December 14, 2022, the defendant was arrested, transported to the 
federal courthouse, and scheduled for his initial appearance before United States 
Magistrate Judge David A. Baker.  However, the defendant was unable to participate 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 1 of 7 PageID 98

2 
 
in an initial appearance due to reported medical issues.1 The United States Marshals 
Service ultimately transported the defendant to the Medical Provider, where he has 
since remained. See Doc. 21 (ordering the defendant into the custody of USMS for 
medical evaluation).  
3. 
On December 27, 2022, a portion of the defendant’s initial appearance 
was held before United States Magistrate Judge Embry J. Kidd.2 During the initial 
appearance, the defendant provided only non-verbal responses to the Court’s 
questions. Defendant’s counsel reported an inability to decipher whether the 
defendant’s limitations were a result of physical/medical issues or a result of 
competency issues. Because defense counsel does not have access to the defendant’s 
medical records and has not been provided any updates or reports from the Medical 
Provider, defense counsel is unable to determine if he has concerns about the 
defendant’s competency.3  
4. 
In order to move this case forward and determine whether the defendant 
requires a competency evaluation, the United States and defense counsel jointly 
request an order directing the Medical Provider to release to the United States and 
defense counsel the medical records detailed in Exhibit 1 (the “Medical Records”).   
 
1 The defendant’s initial counsel raised potential competency concerns at the time of the first 
attempted initial appearance.   
2 The defendant and his counsel appeared via teleconference from the defendant’s hospital 
room. Due to the defendant’s physical and/or mental limitations and non-verbal responses, 
the Court was unable to move forward with the defendant’s arraignment and unable to 
complete the initial appearance, which has been continued to December 28, 2022.   
3  Defense counsel reported that a medical release waiver has not been signed by the 
defendant.   
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 2 of 7 PageID 99

3 
 
II. 
Memorandum of Law 
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) 
controls when and how “covered entities” may disclose protected heath information.  
See generally 45 C.F.R. pts. 160-164.  HIPAA prohibits covered entities 4  from 
disclosing or using protected health information absent a specific provision of the 
HIPAA regulations which permits a disclosure.  45 C.F.R. § 164.502.  Generally, the 
HIPAA privacy rule requires patient consent for all disclosures of protected health 
information by a covered entity, unless the rule explicitly permits disclosure.  Id.  
One such instance where the rule permits disclosure of protected health information 
without patient consent is if the disclosure is “required by law.”  The rule defines 
“required by law” as any “mandate contained in law that compels a covered entity to 
make a disclosure of protected health information and that is enforceable in a court of 
law.”  45 C.F.R. § 164.501.  Included in the definition of “required by law” are court 
orders.  Id.   
Specifically, the rule provides that “[a] covered entity may use or disclose 
protected health information to the extent that such use or disclosure is required by 
law and the use or disclosure complies with and is limited to the relevant requirements 
of such law.”  45 C.F.R. § 164.512(a)(1).  Additionally, a covered entity must meet 
certain requirements for uses or disclosures required by law.  45 C.F.R. § 
164.512(a)(2).  Hence, even if a disclosure is otherwise required by law, it must  
 
4 Covered entities include, but are not limited to, a health plan, a healthcare clearinghouse, 
and a health care provider.  See 45 C.F.R. § 160.103. 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 3 of 7 PageID 100

4 
 
nevertheless meet the conditions contained in a provision of the HIPAA rule relevant 
to certain situations, for example: § 164.512(e) (disclosures in judicial or administrative 
proceedings; or § 164.512(f) (disclosures for law enforcement).  Specifically, under § 
164.512(f), “[a] covered entity may disclose protected health information in the course 
of any judicial or administrative proceeding” provided that such disclosure is made 
“[i]n response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal” and “provided that the 
covered entity discloses only the protected health information expressly authorized by 
such order.”  45 C.F.R. § 164.512(f).  
Here, a court order requiring the Medical Provider to release the Medical 
Records to the United States and defense counsel in the course of this judicial 
proceeding would permit the Medical Provider to disclose the defendant’s protected 
health information under HIPAA without the defendant’s consent. See, e.g., United 
States v. Wilson, 2020 WL 1429497, at *3 (E.D. Mich., 2020) (“the protections afforded 
by HIPAA do not come into play because an exception applies.  Disclosure of 
information by way of a court order in a judicial proceeding triggers application of the 
exception in subsection (e)(1), without a release of information from [the defendant]”); 
Such release of the defendant’s Medical Records is needed in this case in order to 
inform the parties regarding the appropriate path forward, including whether the 
defendant’s competency is at issue.  
III. 
Conclusion 
The United States and counsel for the defendant respectfully request that this 
Court enter an Order requiring the Medical Provider to release the defendant’s 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 4 of 7 PageID 101

5 
 
Medical Records forthwith to defense counsel (A. Brian Phillips) and the United States 
(through the undersigned AUSA). 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
ROGER B. HANDBERG 
United States Attorney 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
By: 
/s/ Kara M. Wick                               
Kara M. Wick 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Florida Bar No. 0085578 
400 W. Washington Street, Suite 3100 
Orlando, Florida 32801 
Telephone: (407) 648-7500 
Facsimile: 
(407) 648-7643 
E-mail: Kara.Wick@usdoj.gov 
 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 5 of 7 PageID 102

 
EXHIBIT 1 
 
 
The medical records to be released by the Medical Provider, Orlando Regional 
Medical Center, include the following:  
 
Any and all medical records, reports, results of examinations or tests, doctor’s notes, 
record of prescription medications and other documents related to patient Evan 
Edwards a/k/a Ian Heringa (DOB XX/XX/1958) from December 14, 2022 (the date 
of admission to the Medical Provider) through the date of his release from the Medical 
Provider.  
 
 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 6 of 7 PageID 103

2 
 
U.S. v. EVAN EDWARDS ET AL.  
    Case No. 6:22-cr-201-WWB-LHP 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
 
I hereby certify that on December 28, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing 
with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of 
electronic filing to the following:  
 
A. Brian Phillips 
Counsel for Defendant (Evan Edwards) 
 
Charles E. Taylor 
Counsel for Defendant (Josh Edwards)  
 
 
 
 
/s/ Kara M. Wick                               
Kara M. Wick 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Florida Bar No. 0085578 
400 W. Washington Street, Suite 3100 
Orlando, Florida 32801 
Telephone: (407) 648-7500 
Facsimile: 
(407) 648-7643 
E-mail: Kara.Wick@usdoj.gov 
 
Case 6:22-cr-00201-AGM-LHP     Document 41     Filed 12/28/22     Page 7 of 7 PageID 104

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flmd.408844.41.0.pdf

Size

148,998 bytes

SHA-256

f3c42c8eba97a06df9b4d76865f68016da7d612c227d5d582f31054787188af7

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flmd.408844.41.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)