January 18, 2001; Cass County
1/18/2001 10:14:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:For purposes of simplification, the information presented by the person who requested this opinion and the response from the government entity with which the person disagrees are presented in summary form. Copies of the complete submissions are on file at the offices of IPA and, except for any data classified as not public, are available for public access. On January 3, 2001, Earl E. Maus, the Cass County Attorney, requested an advisory opinion from the Commissioner of Administration. The request, as detailed in the Issues statements below, deals with access to information maintained by ambulance personnel and the applicability of Minnesota Statutes, section 144E.123. In making his request, Mr. Maus indicated that law enforcement personnel are involved in situations where a defendant or suspect requires medical care and statements sometimes are made to the ambulance personnel who provide service. Issues:In the request for an opinion, Mr. Maus asked the Commissioner to address the following issues:
Discussion:Before the discussion of the first issue begins, a clarification is necessary. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, governs the collection, storage, use and dissemination of government data. Data is a term that describes a subset of information and so, to the extent that the Cass County Attorney seeks access to information that is in the minds of ambulance personnel and not recorded as government data, that access is outside the scope of Chapter 13. See Keezer v. Spickard, 493 N.W.2d 614 (Minn. App. 1992). 1. Are the information or reports maintained by ambulance personnel on criminal defendants releasable to law enforcement personnel? Resolution of the issue presented by Cass County requires a review of several different statutory provisions. This review is needed because an ambulance service may be operated by a private enterprise, a private hospital, a public hospital or another government entity and different statutes apply to each situation. In its opinion request, Cass County questioned the applicability of Minnesota Statutes, section 144E.123. This section classifies prehospital data when maintained by the Emergency Medical Services Board as private data on individuals. Minnesota Statutes, section 144E.123, subdivision 3. Prehospital data includes a wide variety of data collected by an ambulance service that are reported to the Emergency Medical Services Board to prove how services are provided. The section does not, however, address how the ambulance services should handle the data they have collected. The first type of organization is an ambulance service provided by a private enterprise. Data collected by this type of ambulance organization are outside the scope of Chapter 13. See Minnesota Statutes, section 13.01, subdivision 3. The Cass County Attorney's Office will need to determine from each private provider whether information is available. A second type of organization is an ambulance service operated by a private hospital. In this case, services are provided according to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 144. Section 144.335, subdivision 3a provides that patient records cannot be released without the consent of the patient. As a result, records of ambulance services operated by a private hospital are not available to law enforcement without the consent of the patient. A third type of organization is an ambulance service operated by a public hospital. In this case, Minnesota Statutes, section 13.384, subdivision 3 classifies the data as private and available in limited circumstances with the patient's consent or pursuant to a court order. Without the consent of the patient or a court order, law enforcement is not entitled to access ambulance service records when the ambulance is operated by a public hospital. A fourth type of organization is an ambulance service operated by a government entity other than a public hospital. In the case of an ambulance service operated by a law enforcement agency or fire department, Minnesota Statutes, section 13.82, subdivisions 3 and 6 make certain data public. To the extent that data other than those specifically listed in subdivisions 3 and 6 of section 13.82 are maintained, those data are public as there is no statute classifying them otherwise. See Minnesota Statutes, section 13.03, subdivision 1. Therefore, law enforcement would be entitled to access data maintained by an ambulance service operated by a government entity other than a public hospital. 2. Should statements made by criminal defendants to ambulance personnel be differentiated between statements about medical care and general statements? If so, would only the general statements be releasable to law enforcement? The analysis here also is done according to the organization operating the ambulance service. For privately operated ambulances, the owner will determine what data and statements it will make available. For ambulances operated by public entities other than public hospitals, all the data are public and so are accessible to law enforcement. For ambulances operated by private hospitals, Minnesota Statutes, section 144.335, subdivision 2(b) provides a broad definition of the types of records that cannot be released without a patient's consent. As a result, there is no difference in the type of statements so neither general statements nor statements made about medical care are available to law enforcement personnel. For ambulances operated by public hospitals, the definition of medical data in Minnesota Statutes, section 13.384, subdivision 1 (b) also is broad and results in a determination that general statements are private data and are not accessible to law enforcement personnel. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issues raised by Mr. Maus is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: January 18, 2001 |
Law enforcement data
Ambulance service data
Medical data
Mental impressions (See: Keezer v. Spickard, 493 N.W.2d 614)
