Can the prosecution use the ex-defense attorney to testify against the defendant?
2006-12-29 01:46:10 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
suppose the ex lawyer for the defense wants to confess, can the prosecution use him or her.
I know people would use the "attorney-client" thing. What about if their was like a psychiatrist or something and a confessed child molester tells him that he commited an act of pedophilia, will docto patient confidentiality apply there?
2006-12-29 01:50:20 · update #1
No. Attorney-client privilege will still prevail (in the USA anyway).
2006-12-29 01:48:11 · answer #1 · answered by Johnny Q. 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is an assumption being made here, which is that the defendant is confessing to a crime which is the reason why he is consulting the attorney. In that case, the attorney-client privilege and the confidential nature of the communication would prevent the attorney from disclosing the information. However, at least under California law, the privilege would not protect a statement that the client intended to commit a future crime or fraud, and quite possibly would not protect confessions to other crimes if they were unrelated to the current representation.
In some states the rule does not apply if disclosure is necessary to prevent harm to someone else. In California, the attorney can, but does not have to, disclose such information. Once the information is disclosed, the attorney could be called to testify about it. A similar rule applies to doctors and therapists, except they are required to report certain types of information which would otherwise be confidential, including credible threats of harm or evidence of child abuse. In California, these people are termed "mandatory reporters."
2006-12-29 08:01:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope, attorney-client privilege extends beyond the point where the attorney was retained. Changing that would make the legal system a nightmare. Even after a case finished, a lawyer could be called in second cases or third to provide testimony in the case of multiple trials. Case in point: You're on trial for killing a family of three. Instead of consolidating the cases, the DA tries them individually. So, you are found not guilty in the first. You go in for the second and third with a new lawyer (who could be court appointed to you). The first court appointed attorney turns state's evidence on you, and you get convicted... See the problem here? Even if you did or didn't do it, you didn't get a fair trial because the DA couldn't meet the burden of proof without that testimony. Mistrial and travesty of justice.
2006-12-29 01:57:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.....a lawyer can be called to the witness stand for any amount of reasons, but there is a rule in law called "Lawyer-Client Privilege" that excludes the lawyer from testifying or giving out any specific information about a client's testimony or confession.
There is an exception though......if the client is involved in a plan to do harm to someone else in the future (murder) and it is confessed to the lawyer, then it is the lawyer's obligation to make those plans known to police authorities.
Besides that.......a lawyer cannot be forced ot cited to testify against you or anyone for anything that was said or confessed between that lawyer and his client....even if he is dismissed.
Best of Luck!
2006-12-29 02:00:10 · answer #4 · answered by Ralph 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can a prosecutor sleep at evening believing that there is a actual danger that the guy they're accusing did not do it. i might want to quite do not ignore that the device is underinclusive (i.e. some responsible bypass loose) than overinclusive (i.e. some threat free are convicted). inspite of the indisputable fact that the challenge you're speaking about not often not often takes position. If it does, the legal professional merely about consistently encourages the defendant to plead responsible, if the defendant is conscious what's powerful for him (not because it enables the legal professional sleep at evening, yet because this is contained in the defendant's perfect pastimes to plead--he receives a lighter sentence than at trial, he might want to be transferred to penitentiary quicker to dodge the hell it truly is the county penitentiary, he might want to dodge different collateral consequences...). In different cases, the reason that the protection legal professional is going ahead is because (a) the defendant, even as responsible, merely isn't responsible of the offense charged (which may be trumped up), (b) there change into some procedural irregularity or overreach by the police that could want to bring about an acquittal (the integrity of the device keeps all of us secure from the overpowering skill of the authorities), or (c) the defendant merely needs their day in courtroom. ninety 3-97% of all criminal prices end with a plea of responsible by the Defendant. it truly is because many of the time, the defendant is responsible of something (besides the actual incontrovertible truth that possibly not the prices extra) even as he's arrested/charged by the police. Assuming that usually the police officials do get it incorrect, and the defendants who bypass to trial easily have self assurance they're threat free, you'll discover how uncommon your celebration takes position. (also note that the conviction cost at trial is likewise very extreme -- i might want to speculate at 80-ninety%. So, there's a ninety 9.6% danger that someone chargedb y the police officials will be convicted or plead responsible, to at least something. Assuming some truthfully threat free human beings in there, you may extremely see how uncommon this celebration is.)
2016-12-01 07:20:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not! The attorney client privilege still remains even after the attorney withdraws or terminates. It is a vital protection so a defendant feels comfortable talking to his attorney. They need to know that what they say is protected. Without this provision our legal system would not function.
2006-12-29 01:50:52 · answer #6 · answered by Illinois-Lawyer 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.
When you talk to your lawyer, what you say to him/her is protected speech. Even if that lawyer is fired he/she is still unable to reveal what you said without your permission. The prosecution can call the lawyer to the stand, but the lawyer doesn't have to answer any questions.
2006-12-29 01:55:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. They would still be breaching the confidentiality of a previous client. His testimony would not hold up in court.
2006-12-29 01:48:44 · answer #8 · answered by dcVixen 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, because it was information gained during attorney/client privilege.
2006-12-29 01:48:28 · answer #9 · answered by glitterkittyy 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What do you mean "if?"
You think lawyers only take cases of people who are innocent?
2006-12-29 11:58:41 · answer #10 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋