State v. Bell, 2020 UT 38 (June 23, 2020)

The court affirmed the court of appeals’ ruling that a criminal defendant was not entitled to a limited review of the victim’s privileged mental health therapy records, because he failed to establish that the victim had a condition that was an element of his defense, which is necessary to qualify for an exception to the mental health therapist-patient privilege contained in Utah R. Evid. 506.  Although the court did not reach the defendant’s constitutional arguments, it instructed the criminal rules committee to review Rule 506 to ensure that it appropriately balances patients’ privacy rights with criminal defendants’ constitutional rights.