ÿWPCb Õ˜¶öo­Ì)¿4e ¿Á_Cp™GÔy­¨ÞI £—"D3EßäÉ=”VLÊ^ƒ-y„£Ã“|5MÖ£å;˺ê'Ô| ÕIu\«KßVfWúR®¾…¶›qÿm ‚FIÎGåbPá3¢º¯}ü1&8}$l ö<_ Y¤#nÞNñ']ßÔf ¢çzµ|GzîÎ'O5Ý2'ä=Ü“EaØ»=inÀrð5혢Äã‚fÿ!EÂ}æÞ°K|òtù#¼ wpëd¶1ª~”Ô>v¿P*c­o·9i"Ý¿ÅtÏé“Çêˆáz^•à0…ºŸRë…«/<Ñ»ÃRƒuçÅí¹þëµÅâžxðŒ–üSÊRsðt—þøeKi3ÚL¥“…ýëkļ„‹ŽL¤Ø"ï%ø[á'ënÇ—Úô*|æYÿ û)ëž—?2k²Û9g `_þJ35½Æ1.Þ BÝK†¢V¶;â‘ðùÍ—Àó¢÷ÎÝφe£‡AΔ¼Ibòë±å„^ÍÒ@ YÔJÕ{´5â,¾“¨¡'µSšõ±œCšîDGÓ›¹bÂÎ/½"X ï¾ê~Žl îöœ½Q-º5†ò†wöFjÛÖ‹è6s W#!ÂUNã %1 0(7^ _w@k4«¿Î mÐç 0lý 0Di ­ +Ì Ý÷ îÔ 5Âß÷0ÖUX[v³÷)á Z[p3ý…0`µd~yy3÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷Œ*¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ BE˜HP LaserJet 4ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ö­¬2‰  D D  E   D v U¦‹-1@Þ0 ˆ3|x *ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Ñ e Ñ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ô_ÔÓ  Ó2.à0  àCooper,€òòThe€Ethical€Rules€Lack€Ethics:€€Tort€Liability€When€A€Lawyer€Fails€To€Warn€AÐ ° ÐThird€Party€Of€A€Clientððs€Threat€To€Cause€Serious€Physical€Harm€Or€Deathóó€(2000)€36€IdahoÐ œì ÐL.€Rev.€479€ !Ô_ÔÓ  Ó12.à0  àState€Bar€of€California€Compendium€on€Professional€Responsibility,€Formal€Op.€1988„1996Ð e Ð(Mar.€1989);€State€Bar€of€California€Compendium€on€Professional€Responsibility,€FormalÐ Qì o ÐOp.€1986„87€(June€1987).€€€ ÓÔ_ÔÓ  Ó3.à0  àMohr,€òòCaliforniaððs€Duty€of€Confidentiality:€€Is€It€Time€For€a€Life„Threatening€Criminal€ActÐ ° ÐException?óó€(2002)€39€San€Diego€L.€Rev.€307,€351. äÔ_ÔÓ  Ó11.à0  àSee,€òòe.g.óó,€òòUnited€States€v.€Ô_ÔCuetoÔ_Ôóó€(7th€Cir.€1998)€151€F.3d€620,€634€[ð ðWe€refuse€to€accept€theÐ e Ðnotion€that€lawyers€may€do€anything,€including€violating€the€law,€to€zealously€advocate€theirÏclientsðð€interests€and€then€avoid€criminal€prosecution€by€claiming€that€they€were€ððjust€doingÏtheir€job.ðððð];€òòUnited€States€v.€Morrisóó€(4th€Cir.€1993)€988€F.2d€1335,€1336 +Ô_Ô13.à0  à€òòIbidóó. ÕÔ_ÔÓ  Ó14.à0  àMohr,€òòCaliforniaððs€Duty€of€Confidentiality:€€Is€It€Time€For€A€Life„Threatening€Criminal€ActÐ e ÐException?óó€(2002)€39€San€Diego€L.€Rev.€307,€364.€ TarasoffWn.AppWnMolinaromisdemeanantsKubbyMutchGoekeBrych t]oi Mohrm]atters unequivocality$unconditionality KÔ_Ô19.à0  àRules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100(D) NÔ_Ô20.à0  àRules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100(C)(1) lÔ_Ô15.à0  àComment€[9]€to€California€State€Bar€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100 íÔ_ÔÓ  Ó16.à0  àW.€Page,€Ô_ÔKeetonÔ_Ô,€et.€al.,€òòÔ_ÔProsserÔ_Ô€And€Ô_ÔKeetonÔ_Ô€On€The€Law€Of€Tortsóó,€section€30€(5th€ed.€1984)€ ×Ô_ÔÓ  Ó1.à0  àòòPeople€óóv.€òòDangóó€(2001)€93€Cal.App.4th€1293,€1298„1299,€citing€òòGeneral€Dynamics€Corp.€óóv.Ð ° ÐòòSuperior€Courtóó€(1994)€7€Cal.4th€1164,€1191 PÔ_Ô17.à0  àRestatement€(Second)€of€Torts,€section€314€(1965) Ô_ÔÓ  Ó18.à0  àSears,€òòBlood€On€Our€Hands:€€The€Failure€of€Rule€1.6€to€Protect€Third€Parties€from€ViolentÐ e ÐClients,€and€the€Movement€Toward€a€Common„Law€Solutionóó€(2003)€39€Idaho€L.€Rev.€451,Ð Qì Ð476. ƒÔ_Ô5.à0  àòòPeopleóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔStanfieldÔ_Ôóó€(1995)€32€Cal.App.4th€1152,€1157-1158 )Ô_Ô8.à0  àòòIbid.óó {Ô_Ô9.à0  àòòPeopleóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔSolisÔ_Ôóó€(2001)€90€Cal.App.4th€1002,€1014. VÔ_Ô4.à0  àComment€[6]€to€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100 ZÔ_Ô10.à0  àòòPeople€óóv.€òòButleróó€(2000)€85€Cal.App.4th€745,€752 tÔ_Ô6.à0  àòòIn€re€Ô_ÔRickyÔ_Ô€T.óó€(2001)€87€Cal.App.4th€1132,€1137. )Ô_Ô7.à0  àòòIbid.óó ‚Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100(D) …Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100(C)(1) dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_Ôñ ñØØñ ñÓ  Óò òÑ€ ïOÑÑ8€Ö%XXdìdÈ8ÑTHE€DUTY€TO€WARN:€€WHEN€AND€TO€WHAT€EXTENT€DOES€IT€APPLY€TOÐ ° ÐCALIFORNIA€CRIMINAL€DEFENSE€ATTORNEYS?ó óÐ œì ÐBy€Lori€A.€QuickÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓà  àAs€criminal€defense€attorneys,€it€is€sometimes€our€experience€that€a€client€tells€us€more€thanÏwe€want€to€know.€€Rarely,€he€or€she€will€convey€to€us€an€explicit€or€veiled€threat€directed€at€us€orÏat€a€third€party.€€When€this€happens,€do€you€have€a€duty€to€disclose€it?€€Trained€as€we€are€to€protectÏour€clientsðð€confidences€and€to€guard€them€through€use€of€the€attorney„client€privilege,€how€do€weÏknow€when€disclosure€is€warranted,€if€ever?€€The€answer€is€basically€reached€through€a€combinationÏof€statutory€law,€case€law,€and€common€sense.Ìòòò òFACTUAL€SCENARIO€#1ó óóóÐ pÀ Ðà  àYou€are€appointed€to€represent€a€client€who€was€convicted€of€several€crimes€of€violenceÏagainst€a€single€victim€and€making€criminal€threats.€€He€was€sentenced€to€a€determinate€term€in€stateÏprison.€€He€is€extremely€angry€and€emotional,€and€writes€numerous€letters€to€you.€€He€also€placesÏtelephone€calls€to€you€when€he€can.€€He€truly€believes€that€he€was€ð ðrailroadedðð€at€trial€by€a€lyingÏvictim€and€crooked€district€attorney€who€together€conspired€to€hoodwink€the€jury.€€The€tone€of€hisÏletters€and€phone€calls€increases€in€emotional€pitch€over€time.Ìà  àAfter€reading€the€record,€you€are€forced€to€conclude€that€while€there€are€a€few€relativelyÏminor€issues€to€raise,€the€evidence€was€overwhelming€and€the€appeal€will€almost€certainly€amountÏto€nothing.€€A€couple€of€days€after€you€complete€your€legal€research,€the€client€calls€and€asks€for€aÏprogress€report.€€You€deliver€the€unfortunate€news.€€The€client€explodes,€spews€expletives€directedÏat€the€victim,€the€district€attorney,€and€trial€counsel,€and€says,€ð ðWhen€I€get€out€of€here,€theyððre€allÏgoing€to€pay!ððÌà  àWhat,€if€any,€action€should€you€take?Ð h+¸&* Їò òòòFACTUAL€SCENARIO€#2óóÐ ° Ðà  àó óYou€are€representing€a€client€who€has€a€relatively€violent€past,€and€who€is€absolutely€lividÐ ˆØ Ðover€the€sentence€he€just€received.€€In€particular,€he€blames€the€trial€judge€who€he€believes€had€it€inÏfor€him.€€While€speaking€to€him€on€the€telephone€during€a€pre„arranged€confidential€telephone€call,Ïthe€client€says€to€you€ð ðThat€judge€is€dead.€€Iððm€going€to€see€to€that€„€soon.ðð€€Do€you€have€a€duty€toÏinform€the€judge€of€the€threat?€Ìò òòòThe€Relevant€RulesÐ À  Ðó óóóà  àA.€€òòBusiness€&€Professions€Code€section€6068óóÐ ˜è  Ðà  àPursuant€to€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(1)€it€is€the€duty€ofÏan€attorney€ð ð[t]o€maintain€inviolate€the€confidence,€and€at€every€peril€to€himself€or€herself€to€preserveÏthe€secrets,€of€his€or€her€client.ðð€€This€would€seem€to€indicate€that€the€clientððs€statement€cannot€beÏdisclosed.€€However,€in€2003,€the€Legislature€added€subdivision€(e)(2),€which€statesÏð ð[n]otwithstanding€paragraph€(1),€an€attorney€may,€but€is€not€required€to,€reveal€confidentialÏinformation€relating€to€the€representation€of€a€client€to€the€extent€that€the€attorney€reasonablyÏbelieves€the€disclosure€is€necessary€to€prevent€a€criminal€act€that€the€attorney€reasonably€believesÏis€likely€to€result€in€death€or,€or€substantial€bodily€harm€to,€an€individual.ðð€€This€provision€becameÏeffective€on€July€1,€2004.€€Its€recency€means€there€is€virtually€no€case€law€discussing€it.Ìà  àB.€€òòEvidence€Code€section€956.5óóÐ $X" Ðà  àThis€section€states€that€there€is€no€attorney„client€privilege€ð ðif€the€lawyer€reasonably€believesÏthat€disclosure€of€any€confidential€communication€relating€to€representation€of€a€client€is€necessaryÏto€prevent€a€criminal€act€that€the€lawyer€reasonably€believes€is€likely€to€result€in€the€death€of,€orÏsubstantial€bodily€harm€to,€an€individual.ðð€€This€is€an€evidentiary€rule,€while€Business€&€ProfessionsÐ h+¸&* ÐCode€section€6068€is€a€codified€rule€of€conduct.€€However,€in€determining€whether€statementsÏcontaining€threats€which€were€made€within€the€attorney„client€relationship€are€admissible,€it€has€beenÏnoted€that€ð ð[m]atters€involving€the€commission€of€a€crime€or€a€fraud,€or€circumstances€in€which€theÏattorney€reasonably€believes€that€disclosure€is€necessary€to€prevent€the€commission€of€a€criminal€actÏlikely€to€result€in€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm,€are€statutory€and€well„recognized€exceptions€toÏthe€attorney„client€privilege.€€[Citations.]ðð׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рè 8  Ðà  àBecause€the€focus€of€this€article€is€on€whether€disclosures€should€be€made€in€settings€otherÏthan€in€court,€the€application€and€reach€of€section€956.5€is€beyond€its€scope.€€Attorneys€should,Ïhowever,€be€aware€that€they€may€be€required€to€testify€to€attorney„client€communications€which€theyÏhave€or€could€have€disclosed€under€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068.€€€Ìà  àC.€€òòAmerican€Bar€Association€Model€Rules€of€Professional€ConductóóÐ  p Ðà  àRule€1.6€governs€confidentiality€of€information.€€Subdivision€(b)€states€in€relevant€part€thatÏð ða€lawyer€may€reveal€information€relating€to€the€representation€of€a€client€to€the€extent€the€lawyerÏreasonably€believes€necessary:€€(1)€€to€prevent€reasonably€certain€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm;Ï(2)€€to€prevent€the€client€from€committing€a€crime€or€fraud€that€is€reasonably€ñ ñrñ ññ ññ ñeñ ññ ññ ñcñ ñeñ ñrñ ñtain€to€result€inÏsubstantial€injury€to€the€financial€interests€or€property€of€another€and€in€furtherance€of€which€theÏclient€has€used€or€is€using€the€lawyerððs€services;€(3)€€to€prevent,€mitigate€or€rectify€substantial€injuryÏto€the€financial€interest€or€property€of€another€that€is€reasonably€certain€to€result€or€has€resulted€fromÏthe€clientððs€commission€of€a€crime€or€fraud€and€in€furtherance€of€which€the€client€has€used€theÏlawyerððs€services.ðð€€Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àD.€€òòCalifornia€State€Bar€Rules€of€Professional€ConductóóÐ ° Ðà  àRule€3„100€states€that€(A)€A€member€shall€not€reveal€information€protected€from€disclosureÏby€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(1)€without€the€informed€consent€ofÏthe€client,€or€as€provided€in€paragraph€(B)€.€.€.€(B)€€A€member€may,€but€is€not€required€to,€revealÏconfidential€information€relating€to€the€representation€of€a€client€to€the€extent€that€the€memberÏreasonably€believes€the€disclosure€is€necessary€to€prevent€a€criminal€act€that€the€member€reasonablyÏbelieves€is€likely€to€result€in€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm€to,€an€individual.€€(C)€€Before€revealingÏconfidential€information€to€prevent€a€criminal€act€.€.€.€a€member€shall,€if€reasonable€under€theÏcircumstances:€€(1)€€make€a€good€faith€effort€to€persuade€the€client:€€(i)€not€to€commit€or€to€continueÏthe€criminal€act€or€(ii)€to€pursue€a€course€of€conduct€that€will€prevent€the€threatened€death€orÏsubstantial€bodily€harm;€or€do€both€.€.€.€and€(2)€inform€the€client,€at€an€appropriate€time,€of€theÏmemberððs€ability€or€decision€to€reveal€information€as€provided€in€paragraph€(B).ððÌòòò òDiscussionó óóó€€€€Ð Ð  Ðà  àTraditionally,€an€attorney€had€no€duty€to€anyone€other€than€the€client,€first€because€of€theÏcontractual€nature€of€the€relationship,€and€second,€because€the€underlying€theoretical€basis€of€the€roleÏof€the€lawyer€as€advocate€precludes€a€concern€for€others,€including€third€parties.€€Despite€a€great€dealÏof€debate€over€whether€a€lawyer€should€be€required€to€give€a€warning€when€a€client€threatens€seriousÏharm€to€a€third€party,€the€ethical€rules€in€most€jurisdictions€doñ ñeñ ñ€not€require€such€a€warning.€€As€ofÏ2000,€only€eleven€jurisdictions€òò„€óóArizona,€Connecticut,€Florida,€Illinois,€Nevada,€New€Jersey,€NewÐ è%8!$ ÐMexico,€North€Dakota,€Texas,€Virginia,€and€Wisconsin€„€òòrequiredóó€a€lawyer€to€reveal€clientÐ À'#& Ðâ âconfidential€information€to€prevent€the€client€from€inflicting€serious€bodily€harm€or€death€upon€aÐ ˜)è$( Ðthird€party.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ° Ðâ âà  àWith€the€addition€of€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(2),€it€appearsÏthat€California€has€declined€to€join€those€jurisdictions.€€Rather,€the€subsection€is€modeled€on€theÏABA€Model€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€Rule€1.6,€òòsupraóó,€€which€requires€that€a€lawyer€ð ðnotÐ 8 ˆ Ðreveal€information€relating€to€representation€of€a€client€unless€the€client€gives€informed€consentððÏexcept€that€ð ða€lawyer€may€reveal€such€information€to€the€extent€the€lawyer€reasonably€believesÏnecessary€.€.€.€(1)€€to€prevent€reasonably€certain€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm€.€.€.€ð ðÌà  àIn€practice,€when€faced€with€a€situation€like€the€hypothetical€presented€above,€how€does€oneÏapply€these€rules?€€In€order€to€determine€this,€it€is€necessary€to€understand€what€they€do€and€do€notÏrequire.Ìà  à1.€€òòDisclosure€is€Permissive,€Not€MandatoryóóÐ  p Ðà  àBy€its€own€terms,€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(2)€states€that€an€attorney€ð ðmay,€but€is€notÏrequired€toðð€reveal€confidential€information€regardless€of€whether€the€client€has€threatened€physicalÏharm.€€Rule€3„100(E)€expressly€states€ð ðA€member€who€does€not€reveal€information€permitted€by€[thisÏrule]€does€not€violate€this€rule.ðð€€Given€Californiaððs€expressed€strong€interest€in€confidentiality€andÏprotecting€the€client,€disclosures€are€not€mandatory,€and€any€such€disclosures€should€be€made€onlyÏto€the€extent€reasonably€necessary€to€prevent€the€foreseen€harm.׃T×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Thus,€no€matter€what€the€clientÐ 0"€  Ðtells€the€attorney,€the€attorney€is€òòunder€no€obligationóó€to€reveal€the€confidential€communication€unlessÐ $X" Ðhe€or€she€wishes€to€do€so.€€Among€the€factors€to€be€considered€in€determining€whether€to€discloseÏconfidential€information€are€the€following:Ìà  àà ` àa.€€the€amount€of€time€that€the€attorney€has€to€make€a€decision€about€disclosure;Ìà  àà ` àb.€€whether€the€client€has€made€similar€threats€before,€and€whether€they€have€everÏacted€or€attempted€to€act€upon€them;Ìà  àà ` àc.€€whether€the€attorney€believes€his€or€her€efforts€to€persuade€the€client€not€to€engageÏin€criminal€conduct€have€or€have€not€been€successful;Ìà  àà ` àd.€€the€extent€of€adverse€effect€to€the€clientððs€rights€under€the€Fifth,€Sixth,€andÏFourteenth€Amendments€of€the€United€States€Constitution€and€analogous€rights€and€privacy€rightsÏunder€Article€One€of€the€Constitution€of€the€State€of€California€that€may€result€from€disclosureÏcontemplated€by€the€member;Ìà  àà ` àe.€€the€extent€of€other€adverse€effects€to€the€client€that€may€result€from€disclosureÏcontemplated€by€the€member;€andÌà  àà ` àf.€€the€nature€and€extent€of€information€that€must€be€disclosed€to€prevent€the€criminalÏact€or€threatened€harm.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð €Ð Ðà  àWhen€considering€these€factors,€it€is€important€to€keep€in€mind€that€criminal€appellants€areÏoften€under€an€extreme€amount€of€stress.€To€assess€the€seriousness€of€a€threatening€statement,€it€isÏhelpful€to€consult€some€of€the€jurisprudence€which€has€evolved€from€Penal€Code€section€422.€€Ìà  àSection€422€requires€that€a€threat€have€unequivocality,€unconditionality,€immediacy€andÏspecificity€sufficient€to€convey€gravity€of€purpose€and€immediate€prospect€of€execution€to€the€victim.ÏThe€four€qualities€are€simply€the€factors€to€be€considered€in€determining€whether€a€threat,€consideredÐ )à$( ÐÑ ïOÑâ  âÑe°Ñâ  âÑ  Ñtogether€with€its€surrounding€circumstances,€conveys€those€impressions€.€.€.€ð ð׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€A€purported€threatÐ e Ðmust€be€examined€on€its€face€and€under€all€of€the€circumstances€in€which€it€was€made€in€order€toÏassess€if€it€conveyed€the€required€gravity€of€purpose€and€immediate€prospect€of€execution.׃!|×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€"ThreatsÐ ° Ðare€judged€in€their€context."׃#0×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€"The€surrounding€circumstances€must€be€examined€to€determine€if€theÐ í ˆ Ðthreat€is€real€and€genuine,€a€true€threat."׃ä×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Those€circumstances€include€the€prior€history€ofÐ Å ` Ðdisagreements€between€the€perpetrator€of€the€threat€and€the€victim€and€conduct€of€the€defendantÏsubsequent€to€making€the€threat.׃˜×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Simply€because€the€perpetrator€does€not€communicate€a€preciseÐ u  Ðtime€or€manner€of€executing€his€threat€does€not€render€it€insufficient.€€(People€v.€Butler€(2000)€85ÏCal.App.4th€745,€752.)€"Thus,€it€is€the€circumstances€under€which€the€threat€is€made€that€giveÏmeaning€to€the€actual€words€used.€Even€an€ambiguous€statement€may€be€a€basis€for€a€violation€ofÏsection€422."׃ L ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Õp Ðà  àIt€is€very€important€to€be€able€to€distinguish€between€the€venting€of€a€frustrated€client€and€oneÏwho€truly€poses€a€danger€to€you€or€to€others.€€This€is€one€of€the€reasons€why€it€is€extremely€importantÏto€forge€and€maintain€a€good€working€relationship€with€your€clients.€€It€is€only€in€this€way€that€youÏwill€have€the€ability€to€determine€whether€a€threat€needs€to€be€taken€seriously€and€perhaps€actedÏupon.Ð  ¨ Ðà  à2.€€òòThe€Threatened€Harm€Need€Not€Be€ImminentóóÐ e Ðà  àNone€of€the€rules€set€forth€above€òòóórequires€that€the€threatened€harm€be€imminent.€€The€ModelÐ =Ø ÐRule€requires€that€the€harm€be€ð ðreasonably€certainðð€to€occur,€while€section€6068€and€rule€3„100Ïrequire€that€the€harm€be,€in€the€lawyerððs€estimation,€ð ðlikely€to€result€in€death€or€substantial€bodilyÏharm.ðð€€The€use€of€these€standards€permits€an€attorney€to€disclose€information€even€though€theÏimpact€of€the€clientððs€intended€actions€may€not€be€apparent€until€far€into€the€future.€€Although€thisÏis€probably€a€scenario€more€likely€to€occur€in€the€corporate€context,€for€example€where€there€areÏtoxic€waste€emissions€or€defective€product€designs€at€issue,€it€can€also€occur€in€situations€such€asÏthe€hypothetical€above,€where€the€client€is€currently€incarcerated€but€is€serving€a€determinate€termÏand€vows€to€injure€someone€when€he€or€she€is€released.€€Despite€the€fact€that€imminence€of€harm€isÏnot€a€prerequisite€to€disclosure€under€any€of€the€rules€discussed,€it€is€certainly€a€consideration€inÏdeciding€whether€to€disclose€the€confidential€information.Ìà  à3.€€òòMust€The€Action€Threatened€By€The€Client€Be€A€Criminal€Act?óóÐ …  Ðà  àModel€Rule€1.6(b)€does€not€require€that€the€act€be€criminal€unless€the€injury€will€be€to€theÐ ]ø Ðòòfinancial€interests€or€propertyóó€of€another.€€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,€subdivisionÐ 5Ð Ð(e)(2)€and€rule€3„100,€on€the€other€hand,€specifically€state€that€disclosure€may€be€made€when€anÏattorney€reasonably€believes€it€€is€necessary€ð ðto€prevent€a€criminal€act€that€the€attorney€reasonablyÏbelieves€is€likely€to€result€in€death€of,€or€substantial€bodily€harm€to,€an€individual.ðð€€Ìà  àCaliforniaððs€approach€seems€preferable.€€An€effective€attorney„client€relationship€dependsÏon€candor€and€openness€in€communications.€€It€would€be€extremely€counter„productive€if€an€attorneyÏwere€permitted€to€reveal€confidential€information€about€an€action€the€client€might€take€which€couldÏresult€in€harm,€but€is€not€criminal.€€The€attorney€is€of€course€free€to€choose€to€reveal€suchÐ +¸&* Ðinformation€when€the€client€intends€to€engage€in€a€criminal€act€that€will€result€in€death€or€seriousÏbodily€harm,€in€order€to€prevent€that€harm€from€occurring.€€No€client€should€expect€that€he€or€sheÏcan€rely€on€an€attorney€to€assist€in€a€course€of€criminal€conduct€that€threatens€human€life.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€€€€€Ð ° Ðà  àIt€should€also€be€noted€that€the€language€of€Business€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,Ïsubdivision€(e)(2)€„€ð ðthe€disclosure€is€necessary€to€prevent€òòa€criminal€actóó€.€.€.€ð ð€„€would€allowÐ Å ` Ðdisclosure€even€if€it€is€not€the€client€himself€or€herself€who€intends€to€commit€the€act.€€Thus,€if€theÏattorney€reasonably€believes,€in€the€hypothetical€above,€that€the€incarcerated€client€has€theÏwherewithal€to€have€someone€on€the€outside€do€the€deed,€he€or€she€would€be€justified€in€making€theÏnecessary€disclosure.Ìà  à4.€€òòWhat€Is€ð ðConfidential€Informationðð?óóÐ ý˜ Ðà  àNeither€the€Model€Rules,€the€California€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€nor€Business€&ÏProfessions€Code€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(2)€contains€a€clear€definition€of€ð ðconfidentialÏinformation.ðð€€Rule€1.6€refers€to€it€only€as€ð ðinformation€relating€to€the€representation€of€the€client.ðð€ÏRules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3„100€defines€it€as€ð ðinformation€protected€from€disclosure€byÏBusiness€&€Professions€Code€section€6068,€subdivision€(e)(1)ðð,€which€in€turn€refers€to€it€only€asÏð ðconfidenceðð€and€ð ðsecrets.ðð€€ð ðMaintaining€confidenceðð€has€been€defined€in€a€California€State€BarÏethics€opinion€as€not€doing€anything€that€would€ð ðbreach€the€trust€reposed€in€[the€attorney]€by€theÏclient.ðð׃@×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€A€secret€has€been€defined€as€ð ðother€information€gained€in€the€professional€relationship€thatÐ ½#X" Ðthe€client€has€requested€be€held€inviolate€or€the€disclosure€of€which€would€be€embarrassing€or€wouldÏbe€likely€to€be€detrimental€to€the€client.ðð׃|×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Because€these€terms€are€so€loosely€defined,€it€has€beenÐ =Ø Ðsuggested€by€one€commentator€that€€a€lawyerððs€authority€to€disclose€confidential€information€shouldÏbe€limited€to€the€clientððs€prospective€criminal€acts.׃0×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€Ð í ˆ Ðà  à5.€€òòInforming€The€Client€That€Disclosure€Will€Be€MadeóóÐ Å ` Ðà  àRule€3„100(C)(2)€requires€attorneys€to€inform€the€client,€at€an€appropriate€time,€of€theÏdecision€to€reveal€confidential€information,€òòif€reasonable€under€the€circumstances.óó€€€Obviously€thisÐ u  Ðis€not€necessary€if€doing€so€would€likely€increase€the€risk€of€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm,€notÏonly€to€the€originally€intended€victim€of€the€criminal€act,€but€also€to€the€attorney€or€members€of€theÏattorneysðð€family.€€Among€the€factors€to€be€considered€in€determining€an€appropriate€time,€if€thereÏis€one,€to€inform€a€client€are€as€follows:Ìà  àà ` àa.€€whether€the€client€is€an€experienced€user€of€legal€services;Ìà  àà ` àb.€€the€frequency€of€the€attorneyððs€contact€with€the€client;Ìà  àà ` àc.€€the€nature€and€length€of€the€professional€relationship€with€the€client;Ìà  àà ` àd.€€whether€the€attorney€and€client€have€discussed€the€attorneyððs€duty€ofÏconfidentiality€or€any€exceptions€to€that€duty;Ìà  àà ` àe.€€the€likelihood€that€the€clientððs€matter€will€involve€information€which€will€beÏdisclosed;Ð ½#X" Ðà  àà ` àf.€€the€attorneyððs€belief,€if€applicable,€that€so€informing€the€client€is€likely€to€increaseÏthe€likelihood€that€a€criminal€act€likely€to€result€in€the€death€of,€or€substantial€bodily€harm€to,€anÏindividual;€andÌà  àà ` àg.€€the€attorneyððs€belief,€if€applicable,€that€good€faith€efforts€to€persuade€a€client€notÏto€act€on€a€threat€have€failed.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РŠ` ÐÓÓò òòòCan€An€Attorney€Be€Liable€In€Tort€For€Failing€To€Disclose€A€Confidential€CommunicationÐ  8  ÐAbout€A€Crime€Which€Does€In€Fact€Occur,€Resulting€In€Death€Or€Serious€Bodily€Injury?óóÓ‚QÓó óÐ ‰$  Ðà  àTraditionally,€in€order€to€establish€a€prima€facie€case€for€the€tort€of€negligence,€a€plaintiffÏmust€establish€each€of€four€elements:€€(1)€€a€duty€to€conform€oneðð€conduct€to€a€standard€of€reasonableÏcare;€(2)€€breach€of€that€duty;€(3)€€causal€connection€or€proximate€cause;€and€(4)€actual€damages.׃|×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¬ ЀThe€common€law€generally€recognized€no€duty€to€act;€however,€the€existence€of€certain€specialÏrelationships€gives€rise€to€a€duty:€€ð ðThere€is€no€duty€to€control€the€conduct€of€a€third€person€as€toÏprevent€him€from€causing€physical€harm€to€another€unless:€€(a)€€a€special€relation€exists€between€theÏactor€and€the€third€person€which€imposes€a€duty€upon€the€actor€to€control€the€third€personððs€conduct,Ïor€(b)€a€special€relation€exists€between€the€actor€and€the€other€which€give€the€other€a€right€ofÏprotection.׃0×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð !¼ Ðà  àWhen€considering€whether€there€could€be€tort€liability€for€a€failure€to€disclose,€the€case€ofÐ ù ” ÐòòTarasoff€v.€Theóó€òòRegents€of€the€University€of€Californiaóó€(1976)€17€Cal.3d€425€inevitably€comes€toÐ Ñ"l! Ðmind.€€There,€it€was€held€essentially€that€a€cause€of€action€did€lie€against€therapists€who€had€in€factÐ ©$D # Ðdetermined€that€a€homicide€suspect€presented€a€serious€danger€of€violence€to€the€victim,€butÏnevertheless€failed€to€exercise€reasonable€care€to€protect€her€from€that€danger.€€Thus,€when€aÏtherapist€determines,€or€pursuant€to€the€standards€of€his€profession€should€determine,€that€his€patientÏpresents€a€serious€danger€of€violence€to€another,€he€incurs€an€obligation€to€use€reasonable€care€toÏprotect€the€intended€victim€against€the€danger.€€Does€the€reasoning€of€òòTarasoffóó€apply€to€lawyers?€Ð Å ` ÐHave€we€a€duty€to€protect€our€clientððs€intended€victims?Ìà  àIn€California,€the€answer€so€far€seems€to€be€a€resounding€ð ðno.ðð€€As€stated€above,€Rule€3„¼100(E)€specifically€states€that€a€lawyer€who€does€not€reveal€information€permitted€by€the€rule€doesÏnot€violate€it.€€Business€&€Profession€Code€section€6068€expressly€states€that€an€attorney€ð ðmay,€butÏis€not€required€toðð€reveal€confidential€information€in€this€context.€€Model€Rule€1.6€leaves€a€lot€ofÏð ðwriggle€roomðð,€stating€in€subdivision€(b)€ð ðA€lawyer€may€reveal€information€relating€to€theÏrepresentation€of€a€client€to€the€extent€the€lawyer€reasonably€believes€necessary:€€(1)€to€preventÏreasonably€certain€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm€.€.€.€ð ð€€Ìà  àThere€are,€however,€two€Washington€state€€cases€which€have€begun€what€may€be€a€trendÏtoward€holding€lawyers€liable€in€tort€for€the€actions€of€their€clients.€€(òòHawkins€v.€King€Countyóó€(1979)Ð 5Ð Ð24€Wn.App.338€[holding€ð ðthe€obligation€to€warn,€when€confidentiality€would€be€compromised€toÏthe€clientððs€detriment,€must€be€permissive€at€most,€unless€it€appears€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€thatÏthe€client€has€formed€a€firm€intention€to€inflict€serious€personal€injuries€on€an€unknowing€thirdÏpersonðð];€òòState€v.€Hansenóó€(1993)€122€Wn.2d€712€[holding€that€ð ðattorneys,€as€officers€of€the€court,Ð •%0!$ Ðhave€a€duty€to€warn€of€true€threats€to€harm€a€judge€made€by€a€client€.€.€.€when€the€attorney€has€aÏreasonable€belief€that€such€threats€are€real.ðð].)€€Thus,€at€least€in€Washington€state,€courts€areÏengaging€in€a€balancing€of€interests,€and€finding€that€it€weighs€in€favor€of€a€lawyerððs€duty€to€the€courtÐ +¸&* Ðand€to€society.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рe Ðà  àNo€California€authority€could€be€found€espousing€these€same€principles,€and€as€stated€above,€Ïso€far€in€California€it€does€not€appear€that€a€lawyer€is€liable€in€tort€for€injuries€inflicted€by€his€or€her€Ïclient.€€However,€as€the€status€of€victim€becomes€ever€more€popular€in€our€society,€it€is€likely€thatÏa€duty€to€reveal€their€clientsðð€confidences€in€certain€situations€will€eventually€be€imposed€uponÏattorneys.€€€€€€€Ìòòò òConclusionó óóóÐ u  Ðà  àIt€seems€clear€that€if€a€client€makes€a€threat€of€death€or€serious€bodily€injury€to€another,Ïattorneys€in€California€so€far€have€no€duty€to€disclose€that€communication.€€The€decision€to€do€soÏis€totally€discretionary.€€However,€should€an€attorney€decide€that€he€or€she€must€make€suchÏdisclosure,€no€more€may€be€revealed€that€is€necessary€to€prevent€the€criminal€act.ñ ñ׃T×ñ ññ ñ׃7T×ñ ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€addition,Ð Õp Ðbefore€doing€so,€that€attorney€must,€òòif€reasonable€under€the€circumstancesóó,€make€a€good€faith€effortÐ ­H Ðto€persuade€the€client€not€to€commit€the€act€or€to€pursue€a€course€of€conduct€that€will€prevent€theÏthreatened€death€or€substantial€bodily€harm,€or€both.ñ ñ׃×ñ ññ ñ׃8×ñ ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€Ð ]ø ÐÌÌÌÐ ½#X" Їñ ñÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌñ ñò òÓ  ÓTHE€MISSING€CLIENT:€€WHAT€ARE€AN€ATTORNEYððS€RESPONSIBILITIES?Ð e ÐBy€Lori€A.€QuickÌÓ  ÓòòFACTUAL€SCENARIOóóó óÐ ° Ðà  àYou€have€been€appointed€to€represent€a€state€prison€inmate€on€appeal.€€He€has€been€more€orÏless€communicative€while€in€custody.€€Then,€your€reply€brief€is€returned€to€you€in€an€envelopeÏmarked€ð ðParoled.ðð€€What€are€the€possible€consequences€to€the€client?€€What€should€you€do?€Ìò òòòRelevant€Case€Lawóóó óÐ u  Ðà  à1.€€òòEscape€From€CustodyóóÐ Mè  Ðà  àAlthough€there€is€no€statutory€law€in€California€for€the€proposition,€it€is€a€long„standingÏcommon„law€rule€that€the€court€has€the€power€to€dismiss€the€appeal€of€an€appellant€who€escapesÏfrom€custody.€€(òòPeople€v.€Clarkóó€(1927)€201€Cal.€474,€477;€òòMolinaro€v.€New€Jerseyóó€(1970)€396€U.S.Ð Õp Ð365,€366€[authorizing€dismissal€of€federal€appeal€when€defendant€escapes€while€appeal€is€pending.].)€ÏThis€rule€is€equally€applicable€to€felons€and€misdemeanants€who€become€fugitives€of€justice€toÏescape€having€to€serve€a€jail€term€imposed€as€a€condition€of€probation€or€as€a€sentence.€€(òòPeople€v.Ð ]ø ÐKubbyóó€(2002)€97€Cal.App.4th€619.)Ð 5Ð Ѐà  àThe€appeal€will€not€necessarily€be€dismissed.€€In€a€case€where€the€defendant€has€escaped€fromÐ  ¨ Ðcustody,€but€is€apprehended€and€returned€to€custody€at€the€time€the€appeal€is€actually€before€theÏreviewing€court,€the€above€rule€of€dismissal€may€be€inapplicable.€€(òòPeople€v.€Mutchóó€(1971)€4€Cal.3dÐ ½#X" Ð389,€399.)€€Also,€the€Court€of€Appeal€may€condition€the€dismissal€on€the€appellantððs€failure€to€returnÏto€custody.€€(See€òòPeople€v.€Buffaloóó€(1975)€49€Cal.App.3d€838,€839€[appellant€given€specific€amountÐ m'#& Ðof€time€to€return€to€custody,€or€suffer€dismissal€of€the€appeal].)€€In€any€event,€this€is€solely€a€stateÏcourt€decision,€since€federal€due€process€does€not€require€the€appellate€court€to€reinstate€the€Ô_ÔappealÐ +¸&* Ðof€a€fugitive,€even€if€he€or€she€has€been€recaptured€at€the€time€€the€appeal€is€actually€reviewed.€Ï(òòGoeke€v.€Branchóó€(1995)€514€U.S.€115€[due€process€does€not€require€states€to€provide€appellateÐ =Ø Ðprocess€at€all;€a€federal€court€rule€not€allowing€dismissal€if€a€fugitive€is€returned€to€custody€beforeÏfiling€notice€of€appeal€is€one€of€federal€procedure€only].)€€€Ìà  à2.€€òòAbsconding€Before€SentencingóóÐ Å ` Ðà  àIf€the€defendant€absconds€before€sentencing€and€is€sentenced€in€absentia,€the€Court€of€AppealÏmay€well€dismiss€a€notice€of€appeal€filed€by€trial€counsel.€€However,€if€the€defendant€is€later€returnedÏto€custody,€the€appeal€may€be€reinstated.€€(òòPeople€v.€Kangóó€(2003)€107€Cal.App.4th€43.)€€A€somewhatÐ Mè  Ðdifferent€rule€applies€if€the€defendant€absconds€before€or€during€trial,€the€trial€is€held€in€his€absence,Ïand€sentencing€is€delayed€until€he€returns€voluntarily€or€otherwise.€€Here,€the€defendant€may€appeal,Ïbut€will€not€receive€the€benefit€of€any€court€decision€that€is€otherwise€being€applied€retroactively€toÏcases€not€yet€final,€if€that€decision€was€rendered€at€a€time€after€which€an€appeal€would€otherwiseÏhave€been€final€in€his€case€if€he€had€not€absconded€and€been€timely€sentenced.€€(òòPeople€v.€Robinsonóó€Ð …  Ð(1991)€229€Cal.App.3d€1620,€1624„1625.)€€Ìà  à3.€€òòSeverance€of€Contact€With€AttorneyóóÐ 5Ð Ðà  àWhen€a€defendant€voluntarily€leaves€the€jurisdiction€of€California€courts€and€severs€allÏcontact€with€his€or€her€attorney,€the€appeal€may€be€dismissed,€because€the€appellant€cannot€beÏbrought€before€the€court€for€enforcement€of€its€decision.€€Although€an€attorney€is€presumed€to€beÏauthorized€to€represent€his€or€her€client,€when€the€client€refuses€to€communicate€with€the€attorney,Ïhe€or€she€strips€the€attorney€of€that€authority.€€In€addition,€a€defendantððs€unilateral€power€to€decideÏwhether€or€not€to€return€to€the€jurisdiction€in€the€event€of€reversal€and€retrial€has€been€held€to€be€anÏabuse€of€the€judicial€process.€€(òòPeople€v.€Brychóó€(1988)€203€Cal.App.3d€1068,€1076„1077.)€Ð +¸&* Ðò òòòWhat€Should€An€Attorney€Do?ó óóóÐ e Ðà  àObviously,€your€goal€is€to€keep€your€clientððs€appeal€from€being€dismissed.€€At€the€same€time,€Ïattorneys€have€an€obligation€to€refrain€from€knowingly€making€false€statements€of€fact€or€law€to€aÏcourt.€€(Model€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct,€rule€3.3(a)(1).)€€Therefore,€while€you€certainly€do€notÏhave€to€volunteer€unsolicited€information€to€the€court€regarding€your€clientððs€departure€for€partsÏunknown,€you€must€answer€truthfully€if€asked€directly€whether€you€know€your€clientððs€whereabouts.€ÏThus,€if€your€client€disappears,€you€should€do€all€you€can€to€locate€him€or€her€before€the€court€everÏfinds€out,€without€alerting€the€authorities€that€he€or€she€has€in€fact€absconded.€€This€can€include:Ìà  àa.€€trying€to€locate€the€client€at€the€address€on€the€probation€report;Ìà  àb.€€contacting€any€emergency€contact€person€that€may€be€listed€in€the€probation€report;Ìà  àc.€€looking€up€your€clientððs€name€in€the€telephone€book;Ìà  àd.€€calling€trial€counsel€„€he€or€she€may€have€the€telephone€number€or€address€of€a€friend€orÏrelative€through€whom€you€may€be€able€to€reach€the€client.Ìà  àIn€the€event€your€clientððs€appeal€is€dismissed,€keep€in€mind€that€the€Court€of€Appeal€has€theÏdiscretion€to€recall€the€remittitur€and€reinstate€the€appeal.€€If€your€client€reappears,€you€shouldÏimmediately€prepare€a€motion€to€recall€the€remittitur.€€Keep€in€mind€also€that€it€has€been€held€thatÏthe€courtððs€power€to€reinstate€an€appeal€ð ðððshould€only€be€exercised€in€those€cases€where€it€is€plainlyÏmade€to€appear€that€a€denial€of€its€exercise€would€work€a€palpable€injustice€or€wrong€upon€theÏappellant.ðð€€[Citation].ðð€€(òòKangóó,€òòsupraóó,€107€Cal.App.4th€at€p.€52.)€€Clearly,€you€need€to€argue€thatÐ •%0!$ Ðdismissing€your€clientððs€appeal€would€work€just€such€an€injustice.€ñ ñÌñ ñ