Zapata v. People

I. Introduction

¶ 80 I respectfully dissent because I disagree with the majority's holding that Murillo's competency evaluation report is protected by the physician-patient or psychologist-client *534privilege and is inaccessible to Zapata.1 In my view, Zapata was entitled to Murillo's competency evaluation report, and the trial court's failure to afford him access to it was erroneous. Further, although I agree with the majority's conclusion regarding the trial court's admission of res gestae evidence, I feel compelled to briefly comment on the concurring opinion.

II. Analysis

A. Privileges and…