MRE Evidence Rule 513. Psychotherapist Patient Privilege.
Rule 513 provides a limited privilege for communications to psychotherapists and counselors. The privilege is applicable only to actions taken under the UCMJ and it is not a broader doctor-patient privilege. In United States v. Rodriguez, 54 M.J. 156 (2000), the Court affirmed the Army Courts ruling that Jaffee v. Redmond does not create a psychotherapist-patient privilege in the military. In United States v. Paaluhi, 54 M.J. 181 (2000), consistent with Rodriguez, the court held that Jaffe v. Redmond does not establish a psychotherapist-patient privilege in the military. The CAAF reversed the conviction, but, holding it was ineffective assistance for the defense counsel to tell the accused to talk to a Navy psychologist without first getting the psychologist appointed to the defense team. Quasi psychotherapist-patient privilege also exists in specific circumstances:
Where psychiatrist or psychotherapist is detailed to assist the defense team, communications are protected as part of attorney-client confidentiality. See United States v. Tharpe, 38 M.J. 8, 15 n.5 (C.M.A. 1993)
Communications made by an accused as part of a sanity inquiry as per Rule 302. See United States v. Toledo, 26 M.J. 104 (C.M.A.), cert. denied, 488 M.J. 889 (1988). C
Confidentiality privilege for statements made during mental responsibility exams may not generally apply retroactively to exams that the military judge considers as adequate substitute for court-ordered R.C.M. 706 examinations. See United States v. English, 44 M.J. 612 (N.M.Ct.Crim.App. 1996), revd on other grounds, 47 M.J. 215 (1997).
Comments on this entry are closed.