State v. MARK R.
17 A.3d 1
| Conn. | 2011Background
- Victim, a fourteen-year-old girl, lived with her mother S, the defendant, and two adopted sisters H and M in Plainville.
- On Oct 25, 2006, defendant injured his eye and later coerced improper sexual contact with the victim while the family watched a movie.
- The contact progressed from touching her stomach and breast to touching her vaginal area and pubic hair, with the victim freezing in fear.
- S and the victim confronted the defendant; they involved Associate Pastor Helmut Getto, who testified at trial.
- The defense was convicted of one count of risk of injury to a child and one count of sexual assault in the fourth degree; sentence totaled 20 years imprisonment with 15 years probation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clergy-penitent privilege admission | Getto testimony involved confidential communications | Statements were privileged and confidential | Getto testimony properly admitted; no confidential family counseling occurred |
| Professional counselor privilege and mandatory reporting | Counselor's records fall under § 52-146s(c)(6) disclosure to department | Privilege remained despite reporting | Privilege abrogated by mandatory reporting so counselor could testify about record content |
| Right to cross-examine victim | Cross-examination essential to expose bias and fabrication motives | Defense needed broader or different lines of inquiry | Court properly limited cross-examination; adequate opportunity remained to challenge credibility |
| Access to victim's private records | Records could impeach credibility; required for confrontation | Records privileged and confidential | Trial court did not abuse discretion; records not exculpatory or impeachment material sufficient for disclosure |
| Reasonable doubt instruction | Requested standard should be used | Instruction diluted the standard | Instructions on reasonable doubt properly given; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Rizzo, 266 Conn. 171 (2003) (establishes clergy-penitent privilege elements)
- State v. Christian, 267 Conn. 710 (2004) (confidentiality assessment standard for privilege claims)
- State v. Orr, 291 Conn. 642 (2009) (imminent risk exception; narrowly construed in context of social worker privilege)
- Hutchinson v. Farm Family Casualty Ins. Co., 273 Conn. 33 (2005) (scope and deference in evidentiary privilege rulings)
- State v. Erickson, 297 Conn. 164 (2010) (Sixth Amendment confrontation standards; cross-examination framework)