Court: Impaired man’s conversation with EMT after crash not privileged

By Cy Ryan

Thursday, June 2, 2011 | 4:04 p.m.

CARSON CITY – An injured person in an ambulance might not want to tell his or her legal troubles to a paramedic.

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that such conversations are not privileged, as they would be between a doctor and a patient.

David M. Rogers had suffered a cut to his thigh while riding a mountain bike. He was driving himself to a hospital when authorities say he caused a seven-car accident in Carson City that seriously injured at least one person.

In the ambulance, Rogers told paramedic Jeff Friedlander he had smoked marijuana, but asked him not to tell police. Friedlander relayed the information to a Nevada Highway Patrol trooper.

Friedlander’s account was permitted in testimony at a trial and Rogers was convicted of driving under the influence of a controlled substance.

In his appeal, Rogers claimed the statement made to the paramedic was protected as a doctor-patient conversation. But the court said the privilege between a doctor and a patient is to encourage candor to allow the best possible medical care.

There was no doctor present at the scene and Friedlander wasn't acting under the supervision or direction of a doctor. Instead, he was an independent emergency medical technician.

The court said the decision of whether to expand privileged conversations to include someone other than doctors would be up to the Legislature, not the courts.

Rogers was sentenced to two to five years in prison.