Johnson v. State
602 So.2d 1288 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The maternal transmission of a controlled substance to a newborn through the umbilical cord after birth but before the cord is severed is not a criminal 'delivery' of a controlled substance to a minor under Florida Statute § 893.13(1)(c)(1), as the legislature did not manifest an intent for the statute to apply to this act.
Facts:
- On October 3, 1987, Jennifer Johnson gave birth to a son.
- Johnson later admitted to a pediatrician that she had used cocaine the night before delivering her son.
- Toxicology tests performed on both Johnson and her son were positive for benzoylecgonine, a metabolite of cocaine.
- In December 1988, while pregnant with a daughter, Johnson suffered a crack cocaine overdose and told paramedics she was concerned about the drug's effects on her unborn child.
- On January 23, 1989, while in labor with her daughter, Johnson told her obstetrician that she had used rock cocaine that morning.
- After her daughter was born, Johnson told a state investigator that she had regularly used cocaine and marijuana throughout her pregnancy.
- For both births, cocaine metabolites were transferred from Johnson's blood to the infants through the umbilical cord, including during the 60-to-90 second period after birth but before the cord was severed.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Florida charged Jennifer Johnson in trial court with two counts of delivering a controlled substance to a minor.
- Following a trial, Johnson was convicted on both counts.
- Johnson, as appellant, appealed her convictions to the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal.
- The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the convictions, with Judge Sharp dissenting.
- The Fifth District Court of Appeal certified a question of great public importance to the Supreme Court of Florida, which granted review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a mother's transmission of a controlled substance to her newborn child through the umbilical cord in the moments after birth but before the cord is severed constitute a criminal 'delivery' of a controlled substance to a minor under Florida Statute § 893.13(1)(c)(1)?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Harding
No. The criminal statute prohibiting the delivery of a controlled substance to a minor does not apply to the transmission of a controlled substance from a mother to her newborn via the umbilical cord after birth. The court adopted the reasoning of Judge Sharp's dissent from the appellate court decision below. Central to this reasoning is the principle that criminal statutes must be strictly construed and, under the rule of lenity, any ambiguity must be interpreted in favor of the accused. The court found no clear legislative intent to apply the term 'delivery'—typically associated with drug trafficking—to the unique biological process occurring between a mother and child during childbirth. The legislative history surrounding child abuse statutes, specifically Chapter 415, showed that the legislature had considered and rejected imposing criminal sanctions for drug-dependent newborns, opting instead to treat the issue as a public health problem. The court concluded that prosecuting mothers under the drug delivery statute would be counterproductive, potentially deterring them from seeking necessary prenatal care, and that creating such a crime is a matter for the legislature, not the courts.
Analysis:
This decision established a significant precedent by refusing to expand the definition of 'delivery' in drug trafficking statutes to include prenatal or perinatal substance transmission. It solidifies the principle that courts should not create new crimes by interpreting statutes beyond the legislature's clear intent, especially in a socially and medically complex area. The ruling effectively channeled the state's response to drug-addicted mothers away from the criminal justice system and toward public health and child welfare systems. This case serves as a major barrier to prosecutors attempting to use existing drug laws to criminalize the conduct of pregnant women who use controlled substances.
Unlock the full brief for Johnson v. State