Background
A Leon County grand jury investigated a $10 million payment made by Centene Corporation to the Hope Florida Foundation as part of a pre-suit settlement concerning alleged Medicaid overcharges. Hope Florida later awarded two $5 million grants to private nonprofit organizations that donated to a political committee opposing a recreational-marijuana amendment.
The grand jury returned no indictment but issued a 116-page presentment declaring that the money had been “misappropriated” through a “sophisticated scheme” and naming individuals it considered responsible. Before the affected individuals had received the statutory opportunity to seek repression or expungement, the State Attorney distributed the confidential presentment to at least 49 recipients. The circuit court expunged roughly 112 pages but denied full expungement and entered orders requiring notice to outside intervenors of any appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The First District reversed and directed the circuit court to expunge the presentment in its entirety. The court held that the grand jury exceeded its authority by declaring conduct unlawful and condemning named individuals for criminal-like wrongdoing while declining to indict them. It also concluded that the cited statutes did not apply to the pre-suit settlement or to money paid directly to Hope Florida rather than received or spent by the State, leaving the presentment’s misappropriation conclusion without support in its own recited facts.
The court identified a separate and independent basis for full expungement: the State’s premature disclosure violated section 905.28(1), Florida Statutes, which keeps an unaccompanied presentment confidential until each impugned individual receives a copy and 15 days to seek relief. Because removing the improper conclusions and individualized condemnations would leave a report of an entirely different tenor, partial expungement was inadequate. The court also reversed the notification orders because they would disclose confidential proceedings ancillary to the grand jury process. Judge Bilbrey concurred in the result but would have relied solely on the statutory disclosure violation without addressing the presentment’s substance.
Key Takeaways
- A Florida grand jury may investigate and report on public offices, but it may not accuse named people of criminal or quasi-criminal wrongdoing without returning an indictment.
- A presentment’s legal conclusions remain reviewable even though courts generally do not reweigh its factual findings or examine evidence beyond the presentment and its exhibits.
- The State’s disclosure of a confidential presentment to people outside the class authorized by section 905.28(1) can independently require expungement.
- Full expungement is appropriate when removing the unlawful material would leave a report with a wholly different tenor.
Why It Matters
The decision sharply distinguishes a grand jury’s legitimate oversight and recommendation functions from an unauthorized adjudication of guilt. It emphasizes that grand-jury secrecy and prepublication review protect people who otherwise have no trial or comparable forum in which to answer reputational accusations.
The ruling also warns prosecutors to restrict distribution of an unindicted presentment to recipients authorized by statute. Confidentiality is breached by the unauthorized disclosure itself, even if recipients are expected to keep the document secret and regardless of how it later reaches the press.