United States v. Steven Gene Chase

Opinion by Judge GRABER; Concurrence by Judge KLEINFELD.

OPINION

A jury convicted Defendant Steven Gene Chase of violating 18 U.S.C. § 115 (a)(1)(B) after he made a threat against agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The jury acquitted him of a charge involving threats to other FBI agents. The threat underlying Defendant’s conviction was expressed to a telephone operator at a Kaiser Permanente clinic. The threats as to which Defendant was acquitted were communicated, during therapeutic sessions, to his psychiatrist, who testified about them.

On appeal, Defendant argues that the psychotherapist-patient privilege precluded the psychiatrist’s testimony about what he told her during therapeutic sessions. We agree and hold that the privilege applied; we decline to craft a “dangerous patient” exception to the testimonial privilege. Thus, the district court erred in admitting the psychiatrist’s testimony regarding threats that Defendant had related during treatment. Nonetheless, we affirm Defendant’s conviction, because the error was harmless.

BACKGROUND

Defendant began receiving treatment at Kaiser Permanente from psychiatrist Kay Dieter in 1997. He was suffering from…

with whom Circuit Judges T.G. NELSON and CLIFTON join, concurring in the result:

I concur in the result, that the conviction should be affirmed. If there were error, it would be, as the majority concludes, harmless. I dissent from the majority’s view that the psychotherapist-patient privilege applies even to a patient’s imminent, seriously intended, and properly disclosed threat to commit murder.

It is important to make clear what this case is not. The majority decision does not preserve confidentiality in therapeutic relationships. This is not a case about a patient who says to his psychotherapist “I have homicidal thoughts and feelings, and although I am not going to act on them, they disturb me and I need your help to get rid of them.” This case involves a patient who says “I am going to kill FBI agents,” has engaged in preparation and has the means to do so, and is understood by the psychotherapist to be voicing a serious intention to act imminently. The patient was understood by his psychotherapist to be past the point of seeking help that would prevent criminal action, so she felt it essential to warn his prospective victims and did so. His therapeutic confidentiality was…

340 F.3d 978 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steven Gene CHASE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 01-30200. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted En Banc March 25, 2003 — San Francisco, California. Filed August 22, 2003. Brett A. Purtzer, Law Offices of Monte E. Hester, Inc., Tacoma, WA, for the defendant-appellant. Jeffrey J. Kent, Assistant United States Attorney, Eugene, OR, for the plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon; Michael R. Hogan, Chief District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-99-60113-MRH. Before: MARY M. SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, and HARRY PREGERSON, THOMAS G. NELSON, ANDREW J. KLEINFELD, SIDNEY R. THOMAS, SUSAN P. GRABER, M. MARGARET McKEOWN, WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, RAYMOND C. FISHER, RONALD M. GOULD, and RICHARD R. CLIFTON, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge GRABER; Concurrence by Judge KLEINFELD. OPINION GRABER, Circuit Judge: 1 A jury convicted Defendant Steven Gene Chase of violating 18 U.S.C. § 115 (a)(1)(B) after he made a threat against agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The jury acquitted him of a charge involving threats to other FBI agents. The threat…