Below is a passage from the State?s own brief filed with the 4th District Court of Appeal this week.
Here is the relevance: in the letters back and forth between Roy Black and the SAO, the letters we contend were released illegally and over which there is now an ethics complaint being heard at the FL Bar against the SAO, the SAO said the pharmacy records they seized indicated enough evidence for 10 counts of Doctor Shopping and that is why they refused our offer of diversion to rehabilitation. Now, if they had that kind of evidence, why did they write the below IN THEIR OWN BRIEF????
In case you have trouble reading the above sentence as it appears in the actual SAO brief, it says, “The State will not be in a position to know what it can charge, if anything, until the records are reviewed.”