People v. Stritzinger

In People v. Stritzinger (1983) 34 Cal.3d 505, the defendant was convicted of several counts of child molestation involving his stepdaughter. During a counseling session, the victim revealed to a psychologist that the defendant had engaged in sexual activity with her, and the psychologist immediately reported the matter to the child welfare agency. The defendant met with the psychologist the next day, and also discussed his sexual relations with the victim. Over the defendant's objection, the trial court admitted the psychologist's testimony regarding his session with the defendant. After discussing the psychotherapist-patient privilege and the statutory scheme on child abuse reporting, the court stated: "Lest there be any doubt that the Legislature intended the child abuse reporting obligation to take precedence over the physician-patient or psychotherapist- patient privilege, section 11171, subdivision (b), explicitly provides an exception to these very privileges . . . . The Legislature obviously intended to provide specific exception to the general privileges set out in the Evidence Code (Evid. Code, 994, 1014) so that incidents of child abuse might be promptly investigated and prosecuted." ( Id. at p. 512.) The court held that the trial court erred in admitting the psychologist's testimony as to his session with the defendant, because it did not contain any information that the psychologist was required to report under the Act. ( Id. at pp. 513- 514.)