CourtCases2010

2d at 153 fla 1989ehrlich cj concurring cert denied

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ering, 477 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 1985). The federal privacy provision, on the other hand, extends only to 66 such fundamental interests as marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and the rearing and educating of children. Carey v. Population Serv. Int'l, 431 U.S. 678, 97 S. Ct. 2010, 52 L. Ed. 2d 675 (1977) Although Florida's privacy right provides greater protection than the federal constitution, it was not intended to be a guarantee against all intrusion into the life of an individual. Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners [*1028] re Applicant, 443 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 1983). First, the privacy [**7] provision applies only to government action, and the right provided under that provision is circumscribed and limited by the circumstances in which it is asserted. Id. Further, "determining 'whether an individual has a legitimate expectation of privacy in any given case must be made by considering all the circumstances, especially objective manifestations of that expectation.'" Stall v. State, 570 So. 2d 257, 260 (Fla. 1990) (alteration in original)(quoting Shaktman, 553 So. 2d at 153 (Fla. 1989)(Ehrlich, C.J., concurring)), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1250, 111 S. Ct. 2888, 115 L. Ed. 2d 1054 (1991). Thus, to determine whether Kurtz, as a job applicant, is entitled to protection under article I, section 23, we must first determine whether a governmental entity is intruding into an aspect of Kurtz's life in which she as a "legitimate expectation of privacy." If we find in the affirmative, we must then look to whether a compelling interest exists to justify that intrusion and, if so, whether the least intrusive means is being used to accomplish the goal. In this case, we find that the City's action does not intrude into an aspect of Kurtz' life in which she has a legitimate [**8] expectation of privacy. In today's society, smokers are constantly required to reveal whether they smoke. When individuals are seated in a restaurant, they are asked whether they want a table in a smoking or non-smoking section. When individ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online