JUDGE UPHOLDS PRIVACY FOR JEB BUSH'S DAUGHTER

MIAMI, Sept. 30 - A judge ruled today that staff members at a drug
rehabilitation center in Orlando, where Gov. Jeb Bush's daughter, Noelle, is
receiving treatment, cannot be forced to cooperate with an investigation
into an accusation that she had possessed crack cocaine.

Chief Judge Belvin Perry Jr. of Circuit Court of Orange County in Orlando
wrote in his ruling that patient privacy outweighed law enforcement
interests in cases in which addicts relapse in treatment.

Forcing the institution, the Center for Drug-Free Living, to aid in the
investigation would mean that "all patients who suffer relapses could be
hauled out of treatment programs and into criminal courts on the whim of a
state prosecutor or police officer responding to calls from fellow patients
whose motives for reporting the `crimes' might be questionable," Judge Perry
wrote.

His ruling cited federal and state laws that protect patients' privacy
rights.

Ms. Bush, 25, the governor's only daughter, has been in court-ordered
rehabilitation since February, shortly after being charged with prescription
fraud. In January, Ms. Bush tried to obtain an anti-anxiety drug, Xanax,
from a pharmacy in Tallahassee with a prescription that the police said she
had written for herself.

In July, a judge found her in contempt of court and sent her to jail for 72
hours, after staff members at her resident drug-treatment center had found
prescription pills in her possession that a nurse said had been stolen from
the center's medicine cabinet. Ms. Bush said she had found the pills on the
center's grounds, but administrators there called her explanation a
fabrication.

In the latest incident, a fellow patient at the treatment center told the
police on Sept. 9 that Ms. Bush had been found with crack cocaine in her sho
e and suggested that she was receiving special treatment because of her
family connections. President Bush is her uncle.

Supervisors and employees at the center refused to cooperate with the
authorities in the investigation, contending that patient confidentiality,
and not Ms. Bush's celebrity, prohibited them from providing statements and
evidence.

Seeking to force cooperation, the Orange County state attorney's office
issued subpoenas to four employees at the center and argued in court that
prosecutors had a duty to investigate all reports of criminal activity and
that failing to compel employees' testimony would amount to granting drug
patients the license to commit drug offenses, protected by blanket immunity.

Lawyers for the center argued that state and federal law upheld the right to
privacy related to rehabilitation. Judge Perry agreed.

"If drug-addicted patients could be taken by the police and delivered to
regular criminal court for the crime of possession of drugs, the
treatment-based intervention program would be rendered meaningless," he
wrote.

The state attorney's office said it would appeal the ruling.

Ms. Bush's lawyer, Peter Antonacci, did not return calls for comment. Mr.
Bush's office also did not return calls.

Mr. Bush, a Republican, has acknowledged his daughter's problems with
substance abuse on several occasions, calling it a difficult family matter.
The subject has not emerged as an issue in his campaign for re-election in
November.

Legal experts and drug-treatment centers across the country had been closely
watching the case because of its possible implications not just for Ms.
Bush, but also as it relates to broader patient privacy.

"There is not simply the private interest of a single patient to be
considered," said Kate O'Neill, a lawyer for the Legal Action Center, an
advocacy organization that specializes in drug issues and has been
monitoring the Bush case. "Treatment providers need real assurances that
their privacy will be protected. People who need treatment will be afraid to
seek treatment if disclosure of that information is done. It is
counterproductive and also damaging to society's interest."

An assistant state attorney for Orange County, Jeff Ashton, said that his
office disagreed that privacy laws applied to the case and that it would
appeal Judge Perry's ruling to the Fifth District Court of Appeals in
Daytona Beach.

"We respectfully disagree with the court's ruling," Mr. Ashton said. Keeping
a treatment program private is "all well and good, but it shouldn't be a
license to commit crimes with immunity."

Mr. Ashton said the police wanted to investigate whether someone had sold
crack cocaine to a patient or an employee at the center. He criticized the
ruling's saying the incident was not a new crime but part of Ms. Bush's
original drug case.

"I don't know where the court gets this from," Mr. Ashton said. "It clearly
is a new crime. No question about it."

Carlos Burruezo, chairman of the board of the Center for Drug-Free Living
and its lawyer, said the decision was "well reasoned, good and within the
requirements of the law".

Mr. Burruezo said there had been circumstances in which rehabilitation
centers had called the police to retrieve illegal drugs found in a patient's
possession. But there is "never a revelation about the person who had it,"
Mr. Burruezo said.

"The unusual wrinkle in this case," he added, "was that police wanted to
initiate a whole new proceeding based on allegations it received, which is
just not the norm."