CrimLaw

---

The N.C. Supreme Court has ordered a criminal defense attorney to violate his attorney-client privilige "just a little bit."

Perhaps the NC Justices need to go back and reread Swidler & Berlin v. United States. The absolute privilege (except in testamentary matters) extends to the period of time even after the death of the client. There is no "as long as the judge thinks it should be subject to attorney client privilige" exception. In fact:

The contention that the attorney is being required to disclose only what the client could have been required to disclose is at odds with the basis for the privilege even during the client's lifetime. In related cases, we have said that the loss of evidence admittedly caused by the privilege is justified in part by the fact that without the privilege, the client may not have made such communications in the first place. See Jaffe , 518 U.S., at 12 ; Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391, 403 (1976). This is true of disclosure before and after the client's death. Without assurance of the privilege's posthumous application, the client may very well not have made disclosures to his attorney at all, so the loss of evidence is more apparent than real.
Swidler