Did the decision of Terry v Ohio expand or limit the rights of the accused?

Adefendant visited her doctor to seek treatment for a bullet wound. while he was treating the wound, the doctor asked the defendant how she was shot. the defendant replied that she was struck by a police officer’s bullet while running away from a jewelry store she had robbed, but she implored the doctor not to tell this to anyone. the doctor promised that he would not. although the defendant was never charged by the police, the owner of the jewelry store brought suit against her seeking the value of the stolen goods. the defendant denied robbing the store. at the trial, the owner calls the doctor to testify to the statement made to him by the defendant. the defense attorney objects on the ground that such testimony is barred by the jurisdiction’s physician-patient privilege. should the objection be sustained?

Chris, a master at office gossip and innuendo, says, "we know we have a corporate spy someplace in the organization, probably on the management team itself. there is no evidence that it is audrey. in fact, she's too clean, if you know what i mean. somebody should fire audrey; she's got to be the spy." by making this argument chris is actually engaging in (a) an appeal to emotion fallacy (b) a straw man fallacy (c) an appeal to ignorance fallacy (d) circular reasoning (e) an appeal to the mob fallacy

The judicial system of courts derives its powers from what article of the constitution