United States v. Juan Lara
850 F.3d 686
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Juan Lara was convicted in Virginia (2008) of aggravated sexual battery and received a partially suspended 20-year sentence with 20 years supervised probation.
- As conditions of supervised probation Lara was required to attend a Sex Offender Treatment Program (Flora Counseling), permit the provider unrestricted communication with probation, and submit to polygraphs; Lara signed a form acknowledging and agreeing to these conditions before release.
- During intake (April 2010) Lara admitted to uncharged sexual offenses and two murders; he later confirmed admissions on a polygraph and signed a written statement; a July 2010 waiver form also acknowledged that treatment statements were not privileged.
- Flora transmitted Lara’s admissions to the Virginia Department of Corrections; no immediate law-enforcement action followed and Lara completed the program.
- Lara later relocated to Texas, failed to report the move or update registry information, was arrested and indicted federally for violating SORNA; at sentencing for the SORNA offense Lara sought to exclude his treatment-program admissions.
- The district court denied exclusion, finding Lara waived any psychotherapist-patient privilege and that his Fifth Amendment claim failed; the Fourth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lara waived psychotherapist-patient privilege for treatment statements | Lara: participation was compelled by probation conditions so privilege should remain | Government: Lara knowingly and voluntarily agreed to probation terms including disclosure, so he waived privilege | Waiver was knowing and voluntary; privilege waived |
| Whether Fifth Amendment protected Lara’s incriminating treatment statements | Lara: probation condition coerced disclosures (threat of revocation), so privilege should be self-executing | Government: privilege is ordinarily not self-executing; no nearly certain penalty or automatic revocation here | No Fifth Amendment violation; statements voluntary and not compelled |
| Whether court erred in considering treatment statements at sentencing | Lara: sentencing use of these admissions violated privilege and Fifth Amendment | Government: admissions properly admissible due to waiver and voluntariness | District court did not err; statements admissible at sentencing |
| Applicability of "penalty" exception to Fifth Amendment (self-executing privilege) | Lara: ongoing threat of probation revocation made silence infeasible | Government: revocation was discretionary, not nearly certain; no direct evidence Lara confessed from fear | Penalty exception not triggered; revocation not automatic or nearly certain |
Key Cases Cited
- Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (recognizes psychotherapist-patient privilege under federal law)
- Minnesota v. Murphy, 465 U.S. 420 (Fifth Amendment privilege not self-executing; defendant must ordinarily assert it; probation revocation threat insufficient absent near-certainty)
- Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (probation and parole entail diminished expectations and permissible conditions)
- United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (courts may impose reasonable conditions on probation as part of supervision)
- United States v. Bolander, 722 F.3d 199 (privileges may be waived by knowing, voluntary relinquishment)
- Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648 (discusses coercion and the contours of the Fifth Amendment privilege)