## Facts

- John R. Snell, age 59, was in a long-term relationship with a woman whose granddaughters (ages 10 and 11) viewed him as a substitute grandfather.
- Over more than a year, Snell repeatedly performed sexual acts on the two children; on at least one occasion one child witnessed the act being performed on her sister.
- After disclosing his conduct to his partner, Snell was directed to see psychiatrist Dr. Philip Torrance.
- In the presence of one child, Snell admitted to Dr. Torrance that he had committed the acts.
- Dr. Torrance reported the abuse to the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) under New Jersey’s mandatory child-abuse reporting statute.
- DYFS notified police; Snell was arrested and indicted for first-degree aggravated sexual assault.
- The trial court ruled the report was proper and that Dr. Torrance could testify at trial about Snell’s statements.
- Snell pleaded guilty while expressly reserving the right to appeal the evidentiary ruling.

## Issues

1. Whether physician-patient and psychologist/psychotherapist privileges bar a psychiatrist from reporting a patient’s admission of child sexual abuse to DYFS under the mandatory reporting statute.
2. Whether a mandatory DYFS report eliminates or waives the psychotherapist-patient privilege so the psychiatrist may testify at the defendant’s criminal trial about confidential communications.

## Decision

- The court held the privileges yield to the mandatory reporting statute to the limited extent necessary to make a DYFS report; the psychiatrist’s report was required and proper.
- The court held the mandatory report did not abrogate the psychotherapist-patient privilege for evidentiary purposes; the psychiatrist could not be compelled to testify at trial about the privileged communications.
- The court modified the trial court’s evidentiary ruling: it upheld the reporting determination but reversed the ruling permitting the psychiatrist’s trial testimony.
- The guilty-plea conviction was left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory evidentiary privileges must be construed in harmony with other legislative enactments and may yield when the Legislature imposes a clear, competing duty to disclose.
- New Jersey’s mandatory child-abuse reporting law applies broadly to “any person” with reasonable cause to believe a child has been abused, including mental health professionals, notwithstanding physician/psychotherapist privileges.
- The mandatory reporting requirement creates a limited exception to confidentiality for disclosure to DYFS; it does not create a general evidentiary exception allowing trial testimony about privileged therapeutic communications.
- Absent an express statutory exception or recognized waiver, confidential psychotherapist-patient communications remain privileged in criminal proceedings even if a mandated report was made.

## Conclusion

The court reconciled child-protection reporting obligations with therapeutic confidentiality by requiring psychiatrists to report suspected child abuse to DYFS while preserving the psychotherapist-patient privilege against compelled courtroom testimony about the patient’s confidential admissions.


State v. Snell, 714 A.2d 977 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1998)