Carl Client, who is under indictment for homicide, is represented by Attorney Ann. In the course of representation, Carl told Ann that Carl had previously killed two other persons in homicides completely unrelated to the murder indictment for which Ann was providing representation. Ann, with Carl’s consent, made a tape recording of Carl’s confession regarding the unrelated homicides. At Ann’s request, Carl also drew a map on which he designated the remote location of the graves of the victims of the unrelated killings. Those bodies have not been found by the police, and Carl is not a suspect in either crime, both of which remain unsolved. Is Attorney Ann subject to discipline for failing to disclose voluntarily to the authorities her knowledge of the two prior murders and the locations of the bodies of the victims?
A. Yes, because as an officer of the court, Attorney Ann must disclose any knowledge she has, whether privileged or not, concerning the commission of prior crimes by Client Carl.
B. Yes, because Attorney Ann is impeding the state’s access to significant evidence.
C. No, because Attorney Ann did not represent or advise Client Carl with respect to the prior crimes.
D. No, because the information was obtained by Attorney Ann in the course of representation.
Answer:D
Carl Client, who is under indictment for homicide, is represented by Attorney Ann. In the course of representation, Carl told Ann that Carl had previously killed two other persons in homicides completely unrelated to the murder indictment for which Ann was providing representation. Ann, with Carl’s consent, made a tape recording of Carl’s confession regarding the unrelated homicides. At Ann’s request, Carl also drew a map on which he designated the remote location of the graves of the victims of the unrelated killings. Those bodies have not been found by the police, and Carl is not a suspect in either crime, both of which remain unsolved. Is Attorney Ann subject to discipline for failing to disclose voluntarily to the authorities her knowledge of the two prior murders and the locations of the bodies of the victims?
A. Yes, because as an officer of the court, Attorney Ann must disclose any knowledge she has, whether privileged or not, concerning the commission of prior crimes by Client Carl. B. Yes, because Attorney Ann is impeding the state’s access to significant evidence. C. No, because Attorney Ann did not represent or advise Client Carl with respect to the prior crimes. D. No, because the information was obtained by Attorney Ann in the course of representation.
Explanation: This is another confidentiality question. Rule 3.4(a) applies to physical evidence, not client communications. Remember our two scenarios – client gives lawyer evidence or during investigation of the case, lawyer finds evidence. Neither scenario is implicated here, and “B” is incorrect. “D” correctly states the lawyer’s duty of confidentiality. (This question parallels the Belge case).