This week, the New Mexico Supreme Court will decide whether certain evidence will be allowed in the trial of Alexee Trevizo. In 2023, police said Trevizo went to Artesia General Hospital for back pain, but staff later found out she was pregnant. Officers said she gave birth in the bathroom and put the baby in a trash can, where the infant was found unresponsive.On police body camera footage, Trevizo and her mother are heard making statements as doctors gave them the news. One conversation heard on the recording is: Trevizo’s mom: “How big is the baby?”Doctor: “Full term.”Trevizo’s mom: “What, nine months?”Trevizo: “Nothing was crying.” This statement and others that followed are not allowed to be used in court after a district judge decided last summer, the statements fall under physician-patient privilege. The district attorney then filed an appeal with the state’s Supreme Court.”The district attorney wants the state Supreme Court to say that was not applicable here, that these statements were made with other people around. Therefore, there’s no privilege. It’s going to be a really interesting issue that the state courts have generally found that privilege is pretty strong,” said KOAT Legal Expert John Day. In court documents, the state also argued that Trevizo waived her privilege by continuing to talk while officers were present. The defense accused the doctor of “planning entry into the defendant’s room to get incriminating statements.” “That’s where the courts have to make that determination is where does it fall under this privilege? Is it something that the court wants to protect, the idea that you should be allowed to talk to your doctors and nurses to get treatment for yourself? Or does it go beyond that and you’re giving information that’s not needed for medical?” Day said. “It’s going to be a real fact-specific inquiry that the court’s going to have to make. One of the other things that the defense argued was that the doctors were acting sort of as agents for law enforcement. In other words, they were gathering information for law enforcement, not just for medical treatment.” Trevizo’s lawyers did not respond to an interview but spoke to KOAT about this hearing with the Supreme Court last year, when the trial was postponed.The hearing is set for Thursday.
This week, the New Mexico Supreme Court will decide whether certain evidence will be allowed in the trial of Alexee Trevizo.
In 2023, police said Trevizo went to Artesia General Hospital for back pain, but staff later found out she was pregnant. Officers said she gave birth in the bathroom and put the baby in a trash can, where the infant was found unresponsive.
On police body camera footage, Trevizo and her mother are heard making statements as doctors gave them the news.
One conversation heard on the recording is:
Trevizo’s mom: “How big is the baby?”
Doctor: “Full term.”
Trevizo’s mom: “What, nine months?”
Trevizo: “Nothing was crying.”
This statement and others that followed are not allowed to be used in court after a district judge decided last summer, the statements fall under physician-patient privilege. The district attorney then filed an appeal with the state’s Supreme Court.
“The district attorney wants the state Supreme Court to say that was not applicable here, that these statements were made with other people around. Therefore, there’s no privilege. It’s going to be a really interesting issue that the state courts have generally found that privilege is pretty strong,” said KOAT Legal Expert John Day.
In court documents, the state also argued that Trevizo waived her privilege by continuing to talk while officers were present. The defense accused the doctor of “planning entry into the defendant’s room to get incriminating statements.”
“That’s where the courts have to make that determination is where does it fall under this privilege? Is it something that the court wants to protect, the idea that you should be allowed to talk to your doctors and nurses to get treatment for yourself? Or does it go beyond that and you’re giving information that’s not needed for medical?” Day said. “It’s going to be a real fact-specific inquiry that the court’s going to have to make. One of the other things that the defense argued was that the doctors were acting sort of as agents for law enforcement. In other words, they were gathering information for law enforcement, not just for medical treatment.”
Trevizo’s lawyers did not respond to an interview but spoke to KOAT about this hearing with the Supreme Court last year, when the trial was postponed.
The hearing is set for Thursday.
