State v. Wardle
State v. Wardle, 2024 UT App 181 (Harris, J.)
Criminal
Defendant was charged with raping Niece twenty years earlier. Defendant moved under Utah Rule of Evidence 506, asking the district court to review Niece’s medical records from around the time of her disclosure. The court denied the motion, concluding that Niece’s records were privileged and not subject to any exception. Defendant appealed. The Utah Court of Appeals remanded in part and affirmed in part, holding:
- The district court erred in determining that Niece’s medical and therapy records were privileged under rule 506 because Defendant made the necessary showing for an exception to the privilege.
- Practice tip: An alleged victim’s long-standing and complete inability, over the course of many years, to recall incidents that the victim is later able to remember only after medical or therapeutic consultation and that later form the basis for criminal charges constitutes a “condition” for purposes of rule 506(d)(1).