Oregon Supreme Court reverses judge who ordered release of domestic violence victim’s records

The Oregon Supreme Court this week reversed a circuit judge's order that had required an organization supporting domestic violence victims to turn over records to a defendant accused of kidnapping, strangling and assaulting a woman last year.

The ruling stems from a Clackamas County case against Arthur Sacco, 33, who faces nearly a dozen domestic violence-related charges.

In response to a request from Sacco's lawyers, Circuit Judge Ulanda Watkins ordered Clackamas Women's Services to produce records showing whether the organization provided financial assistance and a cellphone to the alleged victim.

Sacco sought the records, the Oregon Supreme Court ruling says, to support his contention that the woman "fabricated her claims of domestic violence to obtain financial assistance" from Clackamas Women's Services, the county's longstanding and largest advocacy organization serving survivors of domestic violence.

Watkins ordered the nonprofit to "produce records disclosing the cell phone information and the amount and type of any financial assistance" it provided the woman.

The organization fought the order and asked the Oregon Supreme Court to intervene in an appeal known as mandamus — a relatively speedy appeal directly to the Supreme Court to resolve a legal issue in a pending case.

Sacco is set for trial early next year.

The nonprofit in its court filings did not acknowledge whether it provided services to the woman allegedly assaulted by Sacco but regardless claimed the records Watkins ordered it to release were confidential under a state law passed by the Legislature more than a decade ago.

The Supreme Court agreed.

In a ruling issued Thursday, the court said state law protects records created or maintained in the course of providing services to domestic violence victims from disclosure.

Emily Rena-Dozier, an attorney with the Oregon Law Center who represented the organization, hailed the ruling as an important signal to survivors of domestic violence that the information they provide to organizations that support them is confidential.

"While criminal defendants have important constitutional rights, that doesn't necessarily mean that they can seek these records that the Legislature intended to protect," she said.

Melissa Erlbaum, executive director of the Clackamas Women's Services, said Watkins' order led defense lawyers to seek similar records from her organization in domestic violence cases.

She called the Supreme Court's ruling "foundational" and called the promise of confidentiality her organization makes to victims of domestic violence "our North Star."

"The reason confidentiality is so key is because, as you can imagine, these are very personal details that people are sharing about their lives," she said, adding that in some instances their lives may be at risk due to the threat of domestic violence.

"The ability to be able to have a conversation with an advocate, to know that that is confidential ... that you can do so from a place of trust and confidentiality is really the core of what our work is built around."