Attorney Client Privilege Case Study

These two statements present clear support for the conclusion that Wasserstrom believes lawyers are positioned in an amoral world. The second conclusion is defended by many statements and situations concerning the lawyer?client relationship. Wasserstrom identifies a few dominant traits with in this relationship containing inequality, created by role-differentiation, and vulnerability.

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution states: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to have the assistance of counsel for his defense” (U.S. Const. amend. VI). The history of the modern right to counsel dates back to over a century ago in the Indiana Supreme Court case of Webb v. Baird, 6 In. 13 (1853), in which the right to counsel for a person accused of a crime was officially recognized (Koplow, 2007). However, it was not a decision based on constitutional or statutory law, but a decision warranted under “the principles of a civilized society” (Koplow, 2007). Since the case of Webb v. Baird, the right to counsel has immensely extended beyond just appointing an indigent person an attorney.

The Sixth Amendment’s clause on counsel assistance has also been challenged in regards to the right to an effective performance on the count of the attorney. This concept demonstrates that the fulfillment of the right extends further than just the mere appointment of legal defense.

     This case had to do with an Ernest Miranda who raped a Patty McGee*. After extracting a written confession from the rapist about the situation, Miranda’s lawyer argued that it was not valid since the Phoenix Police Department failed to read Miranda his rights, also in violation of the Sixth Amendment which is the right to counsel. Some factors that helped support Miranda’s arguments were that the suspect had requested and been denied an opportunity to consult with a lawyer; the suspect had not been effectively warned about his right to remain silent; and an incriminating statement must have been given by the suspect. The author of the Arizona court’s decision, former U.S. Senator and

It’s the attorney duty to make sure that certain individuals are doing their job professionally and promptly. I recently received a new case and there a breach in confidentiality accidently.

The purpose of rules of ethics that attorneys are obligated to abide by is to protect the Attorney-Client Relationship and enable full disclosure of information that is necessary for lawyers to provide competent representation in favor of their client. Confidentiality and the Attorney-Client

If all lawyers information and cases were publicly available, there would be a long term effect on the justice system where lawyers wouldn’t take case involving political stances because of threats from the people. Stephen Jones was the lawyer that defended Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing. He took on the case because nobody else would and he wanted to maintain justice. He said that he has a revolver at his office and a shotgun at home because he was scared of threats. He said “the FBI investigated threats against my life,” and “My family had armed guards for 2 ½ years”(Jones) . In “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee, we can see the threats come in when a lawyer, Atticus, takes on a case involving a black man in the racist

Within the book, Dershowitz poses the question of whether prosecutors and defense attorneys are advocates for justice, or only for their clients. The reason for lawyers choosing a client can

The essence of testimonial privileges is to balance the search for truth with that of the unique character of privileged relationships. The US federal laws offer spousal privileges in to persons on the basis that communication between spouses is confidential. This privilege protects against the disclosure of contents of confidential communications between spouses during the course of their marriage. This privilege is applicable in both criminal and civil cases. Either the witness-spouse or the party-spouse can invoke the spousal privilege to deter the other from testifying. The attorney-client privilege, on the other hand, refers to a legal notion, which protects certain communications involving an attorney and his/ her client and maintains these communications as confidential. The attorney-client privilege is among the oldest recognized privileges in the US and encourages clients to make full and truthful disclosures to their attorneys without the prospect of their disclosures being used against them. This allows attorneys to offer candid advice and sufficient representation.

The primary source of the right to counsel is the Sixth Amendment. It states in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for defence. In this article, the development of the right to council will be discussed as well as when the right to council attaches to criminal procedures. The right to self- representation and the role of attorneys as it applies to right to council will be discussed as well.

As the need for legal representation continues to grow across all segments of our population, new and innovative types of legal representation have developed. Limited scope representation, or discrete task representation, allows an attorney to represent a person only in agreed-upon portions of his or her legal case. California Rule of Court 3.35 specifically defines limited scope representation as “a relationship between an attorney and a person seeking legal services in which they have agreed that the scope of the legal services will be limited to the specific tasks that the attorney will perform for the person.” This method of legal representation provides not only a way for individuals to decrease their legal costs, but also to exert greater control over and

Attorney Client Privilege, which originated in Roman and canon law, has evolved into a recognized judicial doctrine and is necessary in order to provide clients with access to effective, well informed counsel. In Upjohn Co. v US the Supreme Court the Court

According ABA Model rule, a lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to the representation of a client, and shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent.

Attorneys are to represent their clients as members of a legal profession. As long as there has been an attorney-client case, there has been disputes regarding the attorney 's loyalty to their clients. Ethically, the adverse action implicates important professional values which include the obligations of legal professionals to provide services to those that need them, to become fully informed regarding legal matters to ensure competence, and to hold confidential clients ' communication. The attorney should always be truthful as well as trustworthy. According to Banks, “trust is an aspect of professionalism, and the encouragement of trust has become a fundamental characteristic in a professional relationship because

Protecting trial preparation work of each party is one of the main justifications for this rule prohibiting discovery and depositions of non-testifying experts. Courts believe that the disclosure of the identities of a party’s non-testifying experts and consultants represents an unwarranted intrusion into the party’s litigation strategy and provides the opposing party with an unjust advantage. There are also four other commonly articulated policy considerations underlying protecting the facts or opinions known by consulting experts from discovery: