Elder Law by Tina Marie Soriano : Cases

Neglect of elderly or disabled adult statute does not violate due process; statute proscribes neglect caused either wilfully or by culpable negligence, rather than simple negligent conduct.  Sieniarecki v. State, 756 So.2d 68 (2000).Protection Of Endangered Persons  2

Neglect of elderly or disabled adult statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied, where defendant engaged in conduct clearly proscribed by statute.  Sieniarecki v. State, 756 So.2d 68 (2000).Protection Of Endangered Persons  2

Statutes regarding the neglect of the elderly or disabled were not facially unconstitutional as violating due process; statutes did not punish mere presence, or wholly passive conduct, but rather penalized the failure of a person to provide basic food, shelter, clothing and medical needs, only where he or she had assumed such a duty.  Sieniarecki v. State, App. 4 Dist., 724 So.2d 626 (1998), review granted 729 So.2d 394, approved 756 So.2d 68.Constitutional Law  4509(1)Negligence  1801

Defendant could not challenge vagueness of statutes regarding the neglect of the elderly or disabled since she engaged in conduct clearly proscribed by the meaning of the statutes.  Sieniarecki v. State, App. 4 Dist., 724 So.2d 626 (1998), review granted 729 So.2d 394, approved 756 So.2d 68.Constitutional Law  739

Defendant's conduct of giving unprescribed prescription sleep aid to 91-year-old woman, for whom she provided nighttime care, so woman would fall asleep such as to allow defendant to entertain male friends did not fall within ambit of statute setting forth offense of neglect of an elderly and/or disabled adult, as statute did not contemplate affirmative acts, but only the withholding of necessities, i.e., food, clothing, shelter and medicine, essential to the elderly or disabled person's well-being.  Maxwell v. State, App. 4 Dist., 2013 WL 1136416 (2013).Protection of Endangered Persons8

The offense of neglect of an elderly and/or disabled adult contemplates the withholding of necessities, i.e., food, clothing, shelter and medicine, essential to the elderly or disabled person's well-being; in other words, it criminalizes depriving elderly or disabled persons of items critical to their health and sustenance, but it does not expressly criminalize affirmative acts.  Maxwell v. State, App. 4 Dist., 2013 WL 1136416 (2013).Protection of Endangered Persons5

The purpose of statute criminalizing abuse of an elderly person is to provide additional protection for individuals 60 years of age or older when the infirmities of aging result in a dysfunction that impairs their ability to provide adequately for their own care and protection.  Watson v. State, App. 2 Dist., 95 So.3d 977 (2012).Protection of Endangered Persons2

Even if a person is 60 years of age or older, a person does not qualify as an “elderly person” within the meaning of the statute criminalizing abuse of an elderly person if he or she does not have an age-related impairment of his or her “ability to provide adequately for the person's own care or protection.”  Watson v. State, App. 2 Dist., 95 So.3d 977 (2012).Protection of Endangered Persons3

Defendant, who was convicted of neglect of disabled person arising from death of her mother, could not challenge statute upon which conviction was partially based on ground that it violated mother's right to privacy.  Sieniarecki v. State, 756 So.2d 68 (2000).Constitutional Law  727

An action challenging an automobile liability insurer's allegedly wrongful conduct in obtaining a release from the victim was a viable action independent of the victim's tort suit against the driver, and, thus, the suit against the driver did not need to be resolved before the victim's suit against the insurer for fraud and overreaching in obtaining the release, even though the validity of the release was an important issue in the tort suit against the driver; although the victim alleged bad faith, she was challenging the insurer's conduct claiming an unfair insurance trade practice and exploitation of the elderly.  Prudential Property and Cas. Ins. Co. v. Gerber, App. 5 Dist., 773 So.2d 571 (2000).Insurance  3379

Defendant had legal duty under common law and aggravated manslaughter of elderly or disabled person statute to care for his elderly and disabled mother himself, or to obtain care for her from others, and to make reasonable efforts to protect mother from abuse and neglect she suffered under brother's care, where mother lived with defendant and brother in home owned by mother and defendant, defendant and brother were entrusted with mother's property, and defendant and brother agreed that brother would do actual work of caring for mother.  Peterson v. State, App. 5 Dist., 765 So.2d 861 (2000), review denied 786 So.2d 1188.Homicide  717

“Caregiver,” within meaning of aggravated manslaughter of elderly or disabled person statute, logically encompasses more than just person or persons who do actual physical work of caring for elderly or disabled adult;  it also reaches those who in fact are entrusted with responsibility for seeing that elderly or disabled adult is being cared for in proper and humane manner.  Peterson v. State, App. 5 Dist., 765 So.2d 861 (2000), review denied 786 So.2d 1188.Homicide  717

Defendant lacked standing to raise facial vagueness challenge to neglect of elderly or disabled adult statute, where defendant engaged in conduct clearly proscribed by statute.  Sieniarecki v. State, 756 So.2d 68 (2000).Constitutional Law  739

In prosecution in which defendant received three sentences to run concurrently, expiration of statute of limitations on charges of lewd or lascivious battery on an elderly person and abuse of an elderly person required that judgment and sentences imposed for those charges be vacated and charges dismissed, while judgment and sentence imposed for burglary of a dwelling with assault or battery would be affirmed.  Lawson v. State, App. 2 Dist., 51 So.3d 1287 (2011).Criminal Law  1166(7)Criminal Law  1186.1

State failed to establish that victim of alleged abuse qualified as an “elderly person,” thus precluding conviction for abuse of an elderly person; although victim was 79 years old, chronological age was not a reliable indicator of his ability to function independently in the world, and evidence showed that victim remained an active and vital man who exercised regularly to stay in shape, lived alone, and functioned successfully in his environment without assistance.  Watson v. State, App. 2 Dist., 95 So.3d 977 (2012).Protection of Endangered Persons3

Evidence was insufficient to show that defendant willfully or by culpable negligence neglected a disabled person as charged; defendant, a psychiatric technician, was supposed to monitor patient on suicide watch every 15 minutes and was also responsible for continuously watching another patient housed in unlocked room and deemed dangerous, defendant could not physically implement both watch orders, defendant, who had no authority to change orders, by necessity had to choose between patients he was to watch, and exercised his discretion and continuously watched patient deemed dangerous, and although unattended patient under 15-minute watch order died of heart attack, defendant possessed no ill motive towards deceased patient.  Jones v. State, App. 1 Dist., 912 So.2d 686 (2005).Health989

In prosecution for aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person, defendant was not entitled to special jury instruction on causation; state alleged that victim's death was caused by defendant's failure to provide medical care, and causation in that regard was defined by culpable negligence statute.  Bayer v. State, App. 5 Dist., 788 So.2d 310 (2001), rehearing denied, review denied 816 So.2d 125.Homicide  1400

Sentence of 10 years imprisonment and five years of probation, imposed on conviction of neglect of an elderly person after revocation of probation following defendant's completion of community control, exceeded statutory maximum, where defendant was not given credit for time previously served on community control.  Chase v. State, App. 1 Dist., 977 So.2d 708 (2008).Sentencing And Punishment  2038Sentencing And Punishment  2041