Advertisement

May 18, 2013

EDMO case addressing waiver of privilege by claim of ineffective assistance postponed

There has been an interesting privilege fight brewing in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri before the Hon. E. Richard Webber, which will examine the scope of privilege waived when a person challenges a conviction for ineffective assistance of counsel.

In Jones v. United States, Case 4:11CV702, James Jones seeks post-conviction relief under 28 USC 2255 by arguing in part that his trial counsel, Robert Taafe, failed to provide competent representation.

While reviewing Taafe's file, the AUSA litigating the case realized that some of the documents were likely privileged. The US Attorney's Office therefore filed a requested a prehearing determination on whether it could review Taafe's file and whether it could question Taafe outside court proceedings about the representation. Among other authority, ABA Formal Opinion 10-456 suggests questioning outside court proceedings is not appropriate, because the waiver of privilege that results from filing a section 2255 motion is rather narrow and requires court supervision.

In an earlier order, available below, Judge Webber set a hearing for this morning. Apparently the hearing was held today, but one subpoenaed witness, Lionel Bailey, failed to appear. Thus, after more than 90 minutes, the hearing was continued so that Mr. Bailey would have a chance to appear.

I will keep an eye on this proceeding, to see how it resolves the question of whether trial counsel should be eligible for examination outside court proceedings.

© Copyright 2013 Armstrong Teasdale LLP. All rights reserved

About the Author

Partner

An accomplished litigator, Michael Downey advises law and accounting firms on legal, ethics and risk management issues and defends those firms in a wide range of matters. Issues handled include partner departures and expulsions, client terminations, fee and fee-sharing disputes, conflicts of interest and waivers, privilege and confidentiality issue, and client solicitations and advertising.

Mike has served as an expert witness and consultant on legal ethics issues; as a hearing officer in Missouri lawyer discipline proceedings and as lead counsel on civil litigation and...

314.342.8072

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

</