Abstract
Imagine the Utah Supreme Court ignoring a defendant’s claim that the confession used as the basis for his conviction was made involuntarily. This idea is outrageous because both the Utah and United States Constitutions protect defendants against compelled self-incrimination, and the public demands that courts uphold constitutional rights. Unfortunately, however, crime victims are not always afforded the same right. In a number of recent cases dealing with defendants’ attempts to gain access to crime victims’ privileged mental health records, the Utah Supreme Court gave no consideration to crime victims’ constitutional rights before determining the records’ admissibility. The purpose of this Note is to offer solutions on how to develop future jurisprudence regarding the treatment of crime victims which, like defendants, have important interests that need protection—including the nondisclosure of their privileged records as reflected in the Victims’ Rights Amendment to the Utah Constitution.
Recommended Citation
Goodwin, Thomas E.
(2011)
"Victims’ Rights in Context: Protecting Crime
Victims under the Utah Supreme Courts’
Analysis of Rule 506(d)(1),"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 2011:
No.
2, Article 8.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol2011/iss2/8