Court of Appeals Clarifies Standard for Requiring an In Camera Review of the Confidential Records of a Victim Advocate
Evidence/Privilege
September 24, 2010
On July 15, 2010, we reported that the Indiana Court of Appeals had interpreted the victim-advocate privilege for the first time in Crisis Connection, Inc. v. Ronald K. Fromme, 930 N.E.2d 1169 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). Today, the Court agreed to rehear the case for the sole purpose of clarifying its holding in In re Subpoena to Crisis Connection, Inc., 933 N.E.2d 915 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), Case No. 19A05-0910-CR-602, and held that a trial court should review the documents once a criminal defendant has satisfied the three-part test in Williams v. State, 819 N.E.2d 381, 385 (Ind. Ct. App. 1004).
Lessons:
On July 15, 2010, we reported that the Indiana Court of Appeals had interpreted the victim-advocate privilege for the first time in Crisis Connection, Inc. v. Ronald K. Fromme, 930 N.E.2d 1169 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). Today, the Court agreed to rehear the case for the sole purpose of clarifying its holding in In re Subpoena to Crisis Connection, Inc., 933 N.E.2d 915 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), Case No. 19A05-0910-CR-602, and held that a trial court should review the documents once a criminal defendant has satisfied the three-part test in Williams v. State, 819 N.E.2d 381, 385 (Ind. Ct. App. 1004).
Lessons:
- A criminal defendant does not need to show that there is a reasonable probability that the records that are allegedly subject to the victim-advocate privilege are likely to contain material information necessary to the defense in order to obtain an in camera inspection of those records.
UPDATE
The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer in this case on December 17, 2010.
Brad A. Catlin
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC
Learn more about Brad and contact us
Download a copy of this article here
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC
Learn more about Brad and contact us
Download a copy of this article here
Trackback Address :: http://www.indianalawupdate.com/trackback/68
