NCJ Number
34685
Journal
Trial Volume: 12 Issue: 5 Dated: (MAY 1976) Pages: 48-50,61
Date Published
1976
Length
5 pages
Annotation
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES SOME OF THE ETHICAL PROBLEMS FACED BY A LAWYER WHEN A CLIENT ARRIVES AT HIS OFFICE FOR A LEGAL CONSULTATION WITH A WEAPON USED IN THE CRIME, CITING PERTINENT COURT DECISIONS.
Abstract
THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT THE LAWYER-CLIENT PRIVILEGE DOES ALSO ENCOMPASS WORDS, SIGNS, AND ACTS COMMUNICATED BY THE CLIENT. HOWEVER, A DISTINCTION IS MADE BETWEEN COMMUNICATIONS IN REFERENCE TO A PAST CRIME (WHICH ARE PRIVILEGED) AND COMMUNICATIONS IN REFERENCE TO COMMISSION OF A FUTURE CRIME OR FRAUD (WHICH ARE NOT). HE ALSO INDICATES THAT A LAWYER SHOULD NOT ADVISE A CLIENT TO DISPOSE OF A MURDER OR ASSAULT WEAPON DURING A LEGAL CONSULTATION UPON RISK OF BECOMING AN ACCESSORY. IT WOULD BE PROPER FOR A LAWYER TO ADVISE HIS CLIENT OF THE 'POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES' SHOULD THE CLIENT BE CAUGHT WITH SUCH INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE. IN ADDITION, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT WHILE A LAWYER MAY TAKE POSSESSION OF THE FRUITS OF A CRIME, HE SHOULD TURN THE EVIDENCE OVER TO THE POLICE IMMEDIATELY. SHOULD A LAWYER RETAIN POSSESSION OF EVIDENCE FOR TOO LONG A PERIOD (OR WITH FELONIOUS INTENT), HE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION.