New Mexico Supreme Court Affirms Protections for Physician-Patient Privilege in Alexee Trevizo Case
A Significant Victory for Patient Privacy: Protecting Confidentiality When Medical Care and Criminal Investigations Collide
On July 30, 2026, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled in favor of Alexee Trevizo, affirming the district court’s order suppressing evidence obtained in violation of her physician-patient privilege.
The Court rejected the State’s argument that mandatory reporting requirements and the presence of third parties automatically eliminate the privilege. Its decision clarifies that patients do not forfeit their right to medical confidentiality simply because law enforcement becomes in
volved in a medical emergency.
The Facts
In the early morning hours of January 27, 2023, nineteen-year-old Alexee Trevizo went to the emergency department at Artesia General Hospital with severe lower back pain, which she rated 10 out of 10. Hospital staff administered multiple medications, including morphine, and ordered a pregnancy test. When the test came back positive, hospital staff did not inform Alexee of the result and continued administering medications, including morphine.
After experiencing severe pain and the sudden urge to have a bowel movement, Alexee ran to the hospital bathroom , where she gave birth in to a baby she said was not crying or breathing. After a newborn was discovered in a trash can, hospital staff notified law enforcement. Despite recognizing that Alexee was experiencing significant blood loss and could die from a postpartum hemorrhage, her doctor did not initially inform her of her medical emergency. Instead, the doctor waited for law enforcement to arrive.
Two armed, uniformed police officers then entered Alexee’s hospital room with her doctor and a nurse. With the officers and nurse positioned at the doorway, the doctor told Alexee that a dead baby had been discovered in the bathroom. Alexee responded, “I'm sorry, it came out of me; I didn't know what to do.”
The officers detained Alexee within minutes. She had not been given an opportunity to exclude anyone from the room before her doctor elicited private medical information in their presence.
The State’s Appeal
The district court granted Alexee’s motion to suppress statements protected by the physician-patient privilege and statements made in the presence of law enforcement without Miranda warnings. The State appealed.
The State argued that the statutory duty to report suspected child abuse or neglect eliminated the physician-patient privilege and that Alexee waived any remaining privilege by speaking in the presence of the officers and her mother.
The New Mexico Supreme Court rejected the State’s arguments concerning the physician-patient privilege.
First, the Court held that the mandatory reporting exception is narrow. A physician’s obligation to report suspected child abuse or neglect does not eliminate the privilege for every confidential communication between a patient and a doctor. Once the hospital had notified law enforcement about the discovery of the deceased newborn, its statutory reporting obligation had been satisfied. Alexee’s remaining confidential communications with her medical providers continued to be protected unless she validly waived the privilege.
Second, the Court rejected the State’s argument that the mere presence of third parties automatically waives physician-patient privilege. Instead, it established a three-part framework for determining whether a patient has waived the privilege under those circumstances:
The patient must have actual knowledge that a third party who is not essential to the patient’s care is present.
The patient must have the mental and physical capacity to waive the privilege.
Under the totality of the circumstances, the waiver must be voluntary.
Applying that framework, the Court concluded that Alexee lacked the capacity to waive her physician-patient privilege and that, in any event, the circumstances did not establish a voluntary waiver.
As the Court explained:
“Despite her unresolved medical crisis, Dr. Vaskas, without authorization, ambushed Defendant, bringing with her two-armed officers who stood in the doorway of her hospital room, and disclosed her personal medical information to all persons in the room without warning.”
The Court emphasized Alexee’s excruciating pain, the medications she had received, the birth she had experienced alone in a locked bathroom, and her ongoing, potentially life-threatening blood loss. In those circumstances, the Court could not conclude that her disclosure was voluntary.
Because the physician-patient privilege resolved the appeal, the Supreme Court did not reach the separate question of whether Alexee’s statements also violated Miranda.
Supreme Court of New Mexico: (from left) Justice Julie J. Vargas, Justice Michael E. Vigil, Chief Justice David K. Thomson, Justice C. Shannon Bacon, and Justice Briana H. Zamora. (Photo courtesy of the Supreme Court.) SourceNM.
A Significant Victory for Medical Privacy
The New Mexico Supreme Court’s decision reinforces an essential principle: patients should be able to seek medical care and communicate candidly with their doctors without automatically surrendering the confidentiality of those communications when law enforcement becomes involved.
“The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed that doctors and nurses are there to provide care, not to act as an arm of law enforcement. The court recognized Ms. Trevizo’s incredibly compromised medical condition, her doctor’s inexplicable decision to withhold that condition from her own patient, and the decision to instead ‘ambush’ Ms. Trevizo and disclose her confidential medical information in the presence of armed police. The Court recognized that she went to the hospital for help and didn’t get it. This case makes clear that a doctor’s duty is to the patient, and that the state cannot base its criminal prosecution on a patient’s confidential medical information. This is a win for patient confidentiality, patient care, and privacy in New Mexico,” said Fayerberg Dodd attorney Amber Fayerberg.
The ruling preserves the distinction between a healthcare provider’s legal obligation to report suspected abuse or neglect and the State’s ability to use a patient’s confidential medical communications as evidence in a criminal prosecution. It also makes clear that the presence of police or family members does not, by itself, establish a valid waiver of physician-patient privilege.
This is an important protection for patient privacy and autonomy, particularly when a patient is in medical distress and may be unable to make a voluntary, informed decision about disclosure. The Court’s decision affirms that medical confidentiality cannot be treated as a formality to be set aside whenever a criminal investigation begins.
Read the Opinion and Watch the Argument
Read the full opinion: New Mexico Supreme Court, July 30, 2026
Watch the oral argument: Amber Fayerberg argues before the New Mexico Supreme Court
Comments