Ethics
MEMORANDUM
To: Reader
From:
Date: February 4th, 2012
Re: Stewart v. State of Arizona (Assignment # 3)
Summary:
Stewart a man sitting in an Arizona prison has filed a petition of habeas corpus against the state of Arizona. Stewart admitted to his original lawyer James Careful that he committed such murders and he didn’t want to but the voices make it irresistible. Mr. Careful after the first conversation told authorities of the conversation he had with Stewart. Stewart who was represented by public defense was found guilty in 6 counts of capital murder. He appealed his conviction and was denied. Stewart was sentenced to life in prison. Stewart believed that his rights were violated by his original attorney. Stewart believes his rights were violated because information and testimony was used against him that related to his confidential conversation with Mr. James Careful. The state claims that the use of the communications with attorney was proper in this case.
Issue:
The issue here is weather the conversation Stewart had with Mr. James Careful violated his rights. Also will filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus be appropriate in this case?
Rule:
http://www.azbar.org/ethics/rulesofprofessionalconduct
Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6
ER 1.6. Confidentiality of Information
(b) A lawyer shall reveal such information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result in death or substantial bodily harm.
(d) A lawyer may reveal such information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
(6) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm.
Comment: Disclosure Adverse to Client
[7] Although the public interest is usually best served by a strict rule requiring lawyers to preserve the confidentiality of information relating to the
To: Reader
From:
Date: February 4th, 2012
Re: Stewart v. State of Arizona (Assignment # 3)
Summary:
Stewart a man sitting in an Arizona prison has filed a petition of habeas corpus against the state of Arizona. Stewart admitted to his original lawyer James Careful that he committed such murders and he didn’t want to but the voices make it irresistible. Mr. Careful after the first conversation told authorities of the conversation he had with Stewart. Stewart who was represented by public defense was found guilty in 6 counts of capital murder. He appealed his conviction and was denied. Stewart was sentenced to life in prison. Stewart believed that his rights were violated by his original attorney. Stewart believes his rights were violated because information and testimony was used against him that related to his confidential conversation with Mr. James Careful. The state claims that the use of the communications with attorney was proper in this case.
Issue:
The issue here is weather the conversation Stewart had with Mr. James Careful violated his rights. Also will filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus be appropriate in this case?
Rule:
http://www.azbar.org/ethics/rulesofprofessionalconduct
Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6
ER 1.6. Confidentiality of Information
(b) A lawyer shall reveal such information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result in death or substantial bodily harm.
(d) A lawyer may reveal such information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
(6) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm.
Comment: Disclosure Adverse to Client
[7] Although the public interest is usually best served by a strict rule requiring lawyers to preserve the confidentiality of information relating to the