September 2019 - Law Office of Frank Ciardi

Five Exceptions to the Defense Attorney Confidence Rule

by The Law Office of Frank Ciardi | Sep 30, 2019 | Criminal Defense

The Sixth Amendment gives defendants the right to effective representation in criminal court. Attorneys cannot be effective unless they know all the facts about a particular case, whether those facts are favorable or unfavorable. So, both New York and federal laws ensure that communications between attorneys and clients remain confidential. There are only a few defense attorney confidence exceptions.

Outside of these rare exceptions, Rochester criminal defense attorneys never voluntarily betray client confidences. However, they may be legally compelled to do so.

Future Crime

If a client expresses a credible threat to carry out a planned crime for the future, attorneys must legally report that information to authorities, even if the remark is otherwise confidential.

Note that this threat must be credible. If Joe says he wants to blow up the Golden Gate Bridge, that’s not a credible threat. If Joe says he wants to blow up a footbridge near his house, that threat may be credible if his Rochester criminal defense attorney knows that Joe has explosives and expertise.

The remark must involve a future crime. Joe might confess to a litany of prior misdeeds, and all those confessions are confidential between attorney and client, even if the disclosure had nothing to do with the charged crime.

Defense Attorney Confidence and Public Statements

This confidentiality exception usually involves statements made in public places, like restaurants. If someone overhears a confession, that person may testify about that fact in court. Legally, people have a lower expectation of privacy in public places than they do in private areas.

This exception is extremely narrow, as are the other privacy-related exceptions listed below. The Supreme Court just ruled on this issue. In 2018’s Byrd v. the United States, the Justices unanimously ruled that police could not search a rented car without a warrant, even though Byrd was not listed on the rental agreement, because he had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Jailhouse Confessions via Phone

Sometimes, these confessions fall under the exception of public statements. If an inmate talks loudly on the phone, it’s reasonable to presume that someone else may hear. This defense attorney confidence exception may also apply if a jailer surreptitiously eavesdrops on a conversation, but these instances are easier for Rochester criminal defense attorneys to counter.

In other cases, jailers or other officials monitor calls as a policy matter. Whenever a recorded voice says the call is being recorded for “quality or training purposes,” it means someone may be listening and whatever you say could be used against you.

On a related note, if Joe confesses his crime to a cellmate, the cellmate may testify about that conversation. Joe’s out-of-court statement is not technically hearsay.

Third-Party Presence

This defense attorney confidence exception comes up frequently. Many defendants need or want spouses, parents, or other people to be present during conversations which should be confidential between attorneys and clients. Prosecutors could subpoena these third parties and force them to testify about the conversation.

A Rochester criminal defense attorney can keep these discussions private by arguing that the person’s presence was necessary. For example, the conference is still confidential if Joe was hearing-impaired and needed a translator.

Subsequent Conversations

As a general rule, if people voluntarily waive their rights, even if they do not understand the consequence of their actions, these waivers are valid. That’s usually true concerning attorney-client confidential communications.

If Joe repeats his tale to his neighbor, the neighbor may testify. But if Joe repeats the conversation to his spouse or his doctor, the discussion may still be confidential, since a separate privilege applies.

Connect with an Experienced Lawyer

Attorney-client conversations are almost always confidential. For a free consultation with an experienced Rochester criminal defense attorney, contact the Law Office of Frank Ciardi. We routinely handle matters in Monroe County and nearby jurisdictions.

Should I Work with a Rochester DUI Attorney?

by The Law Office of Frank Ciardi | Sep 4, 2019 | Criminal Defense

Especially in chemical test cases, many people are resigned about their DUIs. So, they are skeptical about needing a good Rochester DUI attorney. They believe there is little point in hiring one. Often, these individuals may talk to their friends and allow them to confirm their suspicions. The DA will offer you a deal, they say. And, they add that a lawyer can do little to change it.

Although this may be partially true, there is also some falsehood to this thinking. A DUI arrest is not the same thing as a DUI conviction. To change the outcome, you need an assertive Rochester DUI lawyer.

How an Attorney Can Help

It’s easy to see why some DUI defendants feel hopeless. The deck is stacked against them. New York has some of the harshest DUI laws in the country, and Monroe County has some of the most aggressive prosecutors in the state. But a Rochester DUI attorney has one big ace in the hole: The presumption of innocence.

Essentially, as far as the law is concerned, a defendant in a criminal case is wrongfully accused. So, if any defenses are available, a successful resolution is possible. That resolution could be a complete dismissal of charges, a not-guilty verdict at trial, or a plea to a lesser-included offense.

Only an experienced Rochester DUI attorney can evaluate the facts and look for their flaws. Similarly, an attorney knows how to assess the law. So, until an attorney reviews a case, defendants have no idea their legal options.

Furthermore, an attorney is a skilled advocate. Only an attorney makes the aforementioned successful resolutions possible.

Finally, attorneys offer solid legal advice. Many people, especially first-time DUI offenders, have many questions about the legal process. A Rochester DUI lawyer has the answers you need.

A Specific Plan of Action

All these qualities give your lawyer a vision for your defense and the skills to make this vision a reality.

Generally, an aggressive defense begins at the DUI license suspension hearing. Regardless of the outcome, the Administrative License Revocation hearing gives a Rochester DUI lawyer insight into the state’s case and the opportunity to question the arresting officer under oath. This kind of discovery is often invaluable.

Assertive representation early in the process makes it easier to identify and leverage defenses later in the process. Some DUI defenses include:

Lack of Intoxication: In New York, “intoxicated” is not synonymous with “drunk.” Drunk is a general quality, but intoxicated has a precise meaning.
Chemical Test Issues: Breathalyzers are not flawless. The technology these gadgets use is very old. Typically, a Breathalyzer is not much more than a 1930s Drunk-O-Meter with some additional bells and whistles. Both these devices measure breath alcohol level and use that figure to estimate blood alcohol content.
Technical Flaws: In the rush to make DUI arrests, many police officers take illegal shortcuts. And, in a hurry to convict people, many prosecutors overlook important details.

Choosing the Right Rochester DUI Attorney

Sometimes, people can choose between a court-appointed attorney or a private attorney. In most cases, court-appointed attorneys are seasoned lawyers who have handled many DUIs and care deeply about their clients. But there is simply no way to tell. By the time you know your lawyer’s name, the judge has already made the appointment, and these appointments are almost impossible to reverse.

The right DUI lawyer makes a big difference. For a free consultation with an experienced Rochester DUI lawyer, contact the Law Office of Frank Ciardi. We routinely handle cases in Monroe County and nearby jurisdictions.