Tiger Woods has faced this situation before, not only dealing with a Florida arrest but also with legal debates over prescription medications and what information the law can access. In 2017, his DUI case ended with a guilty plea to reckless driving, participation in a diversion program, and a private struggle with painkillers that the public only heard about in bits and pieces. Now, nine years later, the legal process is similar, but this time, Woods’ attorney is challenging what prosecutors are allowed to see.

Douglas Duncan, Woods’ attorney, has officially objected to a Florida prosecutor’s request for Woods’ prescription medication records from January 1, 2026, onward, arguing that his client has a constitutional right to privacy. Duncan asked the court to hold a hearing to decide if the records are relevant to the investigation before allowing the subpoena. He also requested a protective order to keep any released records private.

Prosecutors filed a notice on April 7 to subpoena all of Woods’ prescription records from Lewis Pharmacy in Palm Beach. The defense objected. If the court does not step in, the subpoena will be issued automatically on April 22.

The filing makes clear what prosecutors want: prescription type, pill count, dosage, fill dates, and every warning label, especially those about driving. With no urine test available, the prescription records are the closest alternative to chemical evidence.

The lack of evidence stems from March 27, when Woods declined a urine test at the Martin County Jail following his Land Rover crash on Jupiter Island. The breathalyzer showed 0.000. Deputies observed bloodshot eyes, dilated pupils, and slow movement. A drug-recognition expert assessed him at the scene and determined he was impaired. Sheriff John Budensiek later addressed the outcome publicly.

“We will never get definitive results as to what he was impaired on at the time of the crash.”

Woods pleaded not guilty in Martin County court. He kept Douglas Duncan as his attorney, the same lawyer from 2017, and asked for a jury trial. Duncan filed a response, arguing Woods has a constitutional right to keep his medical records private unless the state can prove to a judge that they are relevant. He also asked the court to keep any released records out of public view.

Attorney Ted Hollander raised the evidentiary gap in the case, saying:

“There could be admissions, there could have been something found in the vehicle, but if there’s no admissions and nothing found in the vehicle and no urine test, they’re going to have a difficult time proving the DUI charge.”

Woods will return to court on May 5. The case is expected to take 6 to 9 months to reach a final decision.

This subpoena battle is not new. It is part of a pattern that began in 2009 and includes four separate incidents. Each one adds context that now hangs over this case.

Tiger Woods’ driving history casts a long shadow over the 2026 case

The 2017 case stands out as the closest comparison. Jupiter police found Woods asleep at the wheel at 3 a.m. with the engine running. Toxicology showed five substances in his system: hydrocodone, Dilaudid, Xanax, and Ambien, among them. Woods pleaded guilty to reckless driving, entered a diversion program, and checked into a clinic for prescription painkiller dependency. None of that is admissible now. What is missing this time is the same level of compliance that gave a full toxicology report in 2017.

The 2021 Los Angeles crash is a different story. Woods drove his Genesis SUV straight through a curve, covering about 400 feet without steering or braking, crossing a median and oncoming lanes before hitting a tree and rolling over.

Woods said he had no memory of driving. Police found an unmarked pharmaceutical bottle at the scene. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department called it a speed-related accident, did not bring in a drug-recognition expert, and issued no ticket.

Former detective Jonathan Cherney, who visited the scene, told USA TODAY Sports:

“It’s easy to conclude that the L.A. Sheriff’s Department was either starstruck and/or there was an attitude of, ‘Well he didn’t really hurt anybody else except himself, so why bother doing anything?’ The problem with that attitude is that nobody gave him any incentive to not do it again.”

Three incidents led to consequences. One did not. The subpoena is the court’s way of closing that gap.