Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

A judge may order disclosure of the allegedly

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: llas. Telephone operator testified that contrary to company rules she listened to the entire conversation: o Lawyer told Clark to get rid of the weapon. Did the court err in admitting the testimony of the eavesdropping operator, because the conversation related was a privileged communication between appellant and his attorney? Holding: Evidence procured bc eavesdropping, if otherwise relevant to the issue, is not to be excluded because of the manner in which it was obtained or procured. "All other persons, whatever may be the relationship between the defendant and the witness, are competent to testify, except that an attorney at law shall not disclose any other fact which came to the knowledge of such attorney by reason of such relationship." So this court holds, that third party eavesdroppers can always testify regardless of whether the communication they overheard was intended to be confidential! Notes: Now with lawyer-client privilege the position taken by this court is rejected universally! o Unknown eavesdropper cannot testify as to otherwise confidential communications! (within the lawyerclient position) W...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online