§ 5945.1. Confidential communications with sexual assault counselors.
(a) Definitions.--As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given
to them in this subsection:
"Confidential communication." All information, oral or written, transmitted between a victim of sexual assault and
a sexual assault counselor in the course of their relationship, including, but not
limited to, any advice, reports, statistical data, memoranda, working papers, records
or the like, given or made during that relationship, including matters transmitted
between the sexual assault counselor and the victim through the use of an interpreter.
"Coparticipant." A victim participating in group counseling.
"Interpreter." A person who translates communications between a sexual assault counselor and a victim
through the use of sign language, visual, oral or written translation.
"Rape crisis center." Any office, institution or center offering assistance to victims of sexual assault
and their families through crisis intervention, medical and legal accompaniment and
follow-up counseling.
"Sexual assault counselor." A person who is engaged in any office, institution or center defined as a rape crisis
center under this section, who has undergone 40 hours of sexual assault training and
is under the control of a direct services supervisor of a rape crisis center, whose
primary purpose is the rendering of advice, counseling or assistance to victims of
sexual assault.
"Victim." A person who consults a sexual assault counselor for the purpose of securing advice,
counseling or assistance concerning a mental, physical or emotional condition caused
or reasonably believed to be caused by a sexual assault. The term shall also include
those persons who have a significant relationship with a victim of sexual assault
and who seek advice, counseling or assistance from a sexual assault counselor concerning
a mental, physical or emotional condition caused or reasonably believed to be caused
by a sexual assault of a victim.
(b) Privilege.--
(1) No sexual assault counselor or an interpreter translating the communication between
a sexual assault counselor and a victim may, without the written consent of the victim,
disclose the victim's confidential oral or written communications to the counselor
nor consent to be examined in any court or criminal proceeding.
(2) No coparticipant who is present during counseling may disclose a victim's confidential
communication made during the counseling session nor consent to be examined in any
civil or criminal proceeding without the written consent of the victim.
(Dec. 23, 1981, P.L.585, No.169, eff. 60 days; Dec. 17, 1990, P.L.737, No.183, eff.
imd.; Dec. 20, 2000, P.L.742, No.105, eff. 60 days)
Cross References. Section 5945.1 is referred to in sections 4415, 4436, 5945.3, 62A03 of this title;
sections 566, 586 of Title 2 (Administrative Law and Procedure).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
48
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2021 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 602 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1992).
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 602 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1992).
· cites it 16× “The instant matter presents us with an opportunity to consider and assess, for the first time, the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. For the following reasons, we reverse the orders of the *271 Superior Court and reinstate the orders of…”
Commonwealth v. Kennedy, 604 A.2d 1036 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 12× “In Wilson/Aultman , the supreme court considered the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1 regarding the confidentiality of communications between a victim and rape counselor.”
Com. v. Segarra, B., 228 A.3d 943 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
· cites it 6× ““The privilege created by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1 is an absolute privilege, which is not overcome even by the constitutional rights of a criminal defendant.”
State v. Patrick J. Lynch, 2016 WI 66 (Wis. 2016).
· cites it 3× “at 57 (citing 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1 (b)). ¶212 In a footnote, the Ritchie court "express[ed] no opinion on whether the result in this case would have been different if the statute had protected the [protective service agency's] files from disclosure to anyone, including…”
Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987).
· cites it 2× “42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1 (b) (1982) (unqualified statutory privilege for communications between sexual assault counselors and victims).”
Commonwealth v. Ritchie, 502 A.2d 148 (Pa. 1985).
· cites it 6× “§ 5945; or sexual assault counsellors, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. *364 The legislative purpose herein was clearly to create an agency, not only to investigate allegations of child abuse, but to provide care, shelter, and erase where possible the cruel stains upon their innocence.”
Commonwealth v. Miller, 593 A.2d 1308 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991).
· cites it 9× “As appellant filed this appeal prior to complying with the trial court order, we need to address the appealability of this matter as well as the applicability of the amended 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1, Confidential communications with sexual assault counselors, to the records involved…”
V.B.T. v. Fam. Servs. of W. Pennsylvania, 705 A.2d 1325 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1998).
· cites it 5× “6 On appeal, no party has questioned the trial court’s finding that the matters of which the plaintiffs seek discovery fall within the ambit of privileges created by several statutory sections: the Sexual Assault Counselor Privilege, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1; the confidentiality…”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Taylor, 841 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2004).
· cites it 2× “In Wilson , this Court held that the newly enacted statutory sexual assault counselor privilege, see 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1(b), barred criminal defendants, who were charged with rape, from access to their victims' files maintained by local rape crisis centers.”
Commonwealth v. Davis, 650 A.2d 452 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 3× “Following a pretrial hearing, on May 11, 1992, the trial court found that such records were absolutely privileged under the statutory sexual assault counselor privilege set forth at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. The trial court held that, even though the victim himself had consented to…”
People v. Foggy, 521 N.E.2d 86 (Ill. 1988).
· cites it 2× “2d 126 (refusing to recognize a common law privilege for communications made to rape counselors; the legislature has since enacted a statute providing an unqualified privilege (see 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1 (1982)).) A contrary result has been reached by the Colorado Supreme…”
Pittsburgh Action Against Rape v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 120 A.3d 1078 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 5× “1(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1(a). 5 Section 6381 of the CPSL, which deals among other things with the admissibility of evidence in administrative expungement hearings, provides in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1(a) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 602 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1992).
“The instant matter presents us with an opportunity to consider and assess, for the first time, the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. For the following reasons, we reverse the orders of the *271 Superior Court and reinstate the orders of…”
V.B.T. v. Fam. Servs. of W. Pennsylvania, 705 A.2d 1325 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1998).
“6 On appeal, no party has questioned the trial court’s finding that the matters of which the plaintiffs seek discovery fall within the ambit of privileges created by several statutory sections: the Sexual Assault Counselor Privilege, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1; the confidentiality…”
Pittsburgh Action Against Rape v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 120 A.3d 1078 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
“1(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1(a). 5 Section 6381 of the CPSL, which deals among other things with the admissibility of evidence in administrative expungement hearings, provides in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
Commonwealth v. Miller, 593 A.2d 1308 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991).
“As appellant filed this appeal prior to complying with the trial court order, we need to address the appealability of this matter as well as the applicability of the amended 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1, Confidential communications with sexual assault counselors, to the records involved…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1(b) — 16 cases
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 602 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1992).
“The instant matter presents us with an opportunity to consider and assess, for the first time, the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. For the following reasons, we reverse the orders of the *271 Superior Court and reinstate the orders of…”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Taylor, 841 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2004).
“In Wilson , this Court held that the newly enacted statutory sexual assault counselor privilege, see 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1(b), barred criminal defendants, who were charged with rape, from access to their victims' files maintained by local rape crisis centers.”
Com. v. Segarra, B., 228 A.3d 943 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
““The privilege created by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1 is an absolute privilege, which is not overcome even by the constitutional rights of a criminal defendant.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5945.1(b)(1) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 602 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1992).
“The instant matter presents us with an opportunity to consider and assess, for the first time, the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1. For the following reasons, we reverse the orders of the *271 Superior Court and reinstate the orders of…”
Commonwealth v. Kennedy, 604 A.2d 1036 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992).
“In Wilson/Aultman , the supreme court considered the scope and constitutionality of the privilege found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1 regarding the confidentiality of communications between a victim and rape counselor.”
Pittsburgh Action Against Rape v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 120 A.3d 1078 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015).
“1(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5945.1(a). 5 Section 6381 of the CPSL, which deals among other things with the admissibility of evidence in administrative expungement hearings, provides in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.