The constitutional ramifications of an attorney's handling of implicating evidence is discussed, focusing on a defendant's right to effective assistance of counsel, the defendant's right against self-incrimination, and the protection that the attorney-client privilege affords these rights. Action taken by attorneys in dealing with implicating evidence is analyzed to determine whether the attorney's conduct constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel or malpractice under present law. The article also focuses on crimes that an attorney may commit when dealing with implicating evidence, emphasizing the crimes of destruction or concealment of evidence. An attorney's conflicting ethical duties in dealing with implicating evidence and situations in which the attorney may be ethically required to withdraw from representing the client are examined. The article makes specific recommendations for advice to clients and third parties who inform attorneys about implicating evidence or who bring the evidence to an attorney's office. Specific U.S. Supreme Court decisions are examined in reference to the aforementioned concerns. A total of 287 case notes are supplied. (Author summary modified)