Generally, not just by asking. When a hospital draws your blood for treatment after a crash, rather than at an officer’s request, California’s medical privacy law protects those results. The main legal routes for police or prosecutors are a valid search warrant, a court order, or, once a criminal case is filed, a subpoena in that case.

California’s medical privacy law controls first

Under California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, a health care provider “shall not disclose medical information regarding a patient” without your authorization, except as the statute’s lists of required and permitted disclosures allow (Civil Code section 56.10(a)). A request from an officer, standing alone, is not on either list. The grounds that matter in a DUI investigation are a valid search warrant “issued by a judicial officer, including a magistrate, to a governmental law enforcement agency” (section 56.10(b)(6)), a court order (section 56.10(b)(1)), and, once a case is pending, a subpoena from “a party to a proceeding before a court” (section 56.10(b)(3)). The statute also has catch-all paragraphs for disclosures that another law specifically requires or authorizes (sections 56.10(b)(9) and (c)(14)).

How a warrant can reach the results

The general evidence ground for a search warrant covers items that tend to show “a felony has been committed,” or that a particular person committed one (Penal Code section 1524(a)(4)). A crash that can be charged as a felony fits that ground most clearly. A first DUI causing injury, for example, can be punished by state prison or county jail (Vehicle Code section 23554).

The Legislature also created a DUI-specific ground: a warrant for “a sample of the blood of a person” that tends to show a DUI violation, when the person “refused” an officer’s request for a blood test or “failed to complete” it, and the sample “will be drawn from the person in a reasonable, medically approved manner” (section 1524(a)(13)). That ground is built for drawing a new sample after a refusal. It is a different situation from investigators seeking a result the hospital already has from treatment. Whether a warrant can reach an existing hospital record in a misdemeanor case with no refusal is not answered by either paragraph, and it is a question to raise with your lawyer.

When a warrant for business records says so, the hospital can comply by delivering copies of the records, with a custodian’s affidavit, directly to the law enforcement agency (Evidence Code section 1560(f)).

How a subpoena can reach the results once you are charged

After charges are filed, the prosecution is a party to the case and can compel hospital records under Civil Code section 56.10(b)(3). A criminal subpoena for business records “shall direct that those items be delivered by the custodian or qualified witness in the manner specified” in Evidence Code section 1560(b) (Penal Code section 1326(b)). In a criminal case, that means the custodian sends “a true, legible, and durable copy” of the records, sealed, to the clerk of the court within five days of receiving the subpoena unless another time is agreed, not to the officer or prosecutor (Evidence Code section 1560(b), (c)). Unless the parties agree otherwise, the sealed copy is opened only at the trial or hearing, at the judge’s direction, with the parties present (section 1560(d)).

Where federal HIPAA fits in

Federal HIPAA regulations separately address police access to medical records, but they work alongside California’s law rather than replacing it. HIPAA permits, without requiring, a hospital to disclose records to police in compliance with “a court order or court-ordered warrant, or a subpoena or summons issued by a judicial officer,” a grand jury subpoena, or a qualifying administrative request (Code of Federal Regulations, title 45, section 164.512(f)(1)). A separate, narrower HIPAA provision lets a hospital give police limited information to help identify or locate a suspect, such as name, birth date, and type of injury, but for that purpose it may not disclose information related to “samples or analysis of body fluids or tissue” (section 164.512(f)(2)). So that identify-a-suspect provision cannot be used to hand over a blood-alcohol result.

HIPAA also does not override a state privacy law that is “more stringent” than the federal rule (title 45, section 160.203(b)). Because a HIPAA permission does not require a hospital to disclose anything, a California hospital still has to fit any release within Civil Code section 56.10.

What this means for your case

Because the answer depends on exactly how the records were obtained, it helps to find out:

  • Was there a search warrant, and what did it specifically authorize the hospital to release?
  • Was there a subpoena, and was it issued after charges were actually filed?
  • Did you sign a written authorization allowing the hospital to release your records to police or anyone else?
  • Was the sample police obtained the same one drawn for your treatment, or a separate test requested by an officer?

As the patient, you can also request your own hospital records under California’s patient-access law (Civil Code section 56.10(b)(7)). These facts bear on whether the legal requirements for release were followed. Whether any problem affects how the results can be used in court is a separate question that depends on the facts, so bring these answers to your lawyer. For how a post-accident blood draw and the testing timeline can be challenged more broadly, see DUI accident defense.

If police or prosecutors have obtained your hospital records after a DUI crash, the Law Offices of David S. Chesley can review how those records were obtained and whether the process was followed correctly. Call (800) 755-5174 to discuss your case.