Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

See clark v state in re von below lawyer client

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: igmore's position is also rejected in most places with respect to spousal! Bar freaked out at this holding unknown eavesdropper can testify, saw the heat really abusing this!! File a motion for rehearing! See below! CLARK v. STATE [Lawyer-Client Privilege: Crime-Fraud Exception] Issue: Now that the court has decided to reject this idea that unknown eavesdroppers can always testify, was the operator's testimony outside of the attorney-client privilege based on the crime-fraud exception? Holding: The conversation was admissible as not within the realm of legitimate professional counsel and employment: the rule of public policy which calls for the privileged character of the communication between attorney and client, demands that the rule be confined to the legitimate course of professional employment! Notes: Court backs off on eavesdropping issue (implicit that that is not good law and we changed our minds) And then they come out with their second theory which is crime-fraud exception: Questionable whether this would hav...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online