When client (defendant) supplies information he or she construes as fact, does the attorney have to say anything if the attorney doesn't believe it? Is that violation of any Bar rules? It's an etiquette violation but is it an ethics' violation? The problem is also about not acting on the client's assertion(s) and not investigating and also not saying there will be no investigation of the allegation(s). I know attorney doesn't have to pursue all leads desired by client, but what about having to inform why not?
In no state does a lawyer have a duty to tell a criminal defendant they think his story is a crock. The explanation for not checking certain things would before like "it was inconsistent with the other evidence in the case." I yield to
Florida counsel of I said something incorrect.
Jennifer L. EllisEthics / Professional Responsibility LawyerPhiladelphia, PA ·
It doesn't matter whether your attorney believes you. What matters is that your attorney zealously represents you. No, it isn't an ethics violation. If you don't believe your attorney is handling your case well, then you should mention your concerns.And/or you should find a new lawyer.
The answer is not as simple as you might think. If a client lies to his attorney, ignoring how foolish that would be, the attorney is under no legal obligation to call his client out. Although, to maintain effective representation the attorney should do so and one could argue he must do so, On the other hand, if it is a certainty that the client will lie and commit perjury and the lawyer knows this, then the lawyer must take the following steps: 1.) Confront the client and convince him he must testify truthfully. That the lawyer can take no action to further the client's intent to commit the crime of perjury and that the lawyer actually must take steps to derail that attempt. 2.) if the client insists that she or he will do so anyway, that the lawyer must inform the client that he will inform the Court of the client's intent to do so. 3.) Despite scenarios 1 & 2, if the client insists on committing perjury the attorney must prevent the perjury by supplying to the Court information sufficient to prevent the crime of perjury.
The answer to the question is NO. But it brings up a scenario which could easily apply to post conviction relief. You would have to read around 50 cases in order to understand fully what I am talking about. I believe it is an attorney's affirmative obligation to explore all defenses. But then it is within the lawyer's professional discretion as to what defenses are actually viable or presentable. This reminds me of a recent matter in which I read the 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance, the lawyer incorrectly and repeatedly informed the client that there was no involuntary intoxication defense. I could write for days on this subject.
Pursuing all leads presented by most clients charged with crime is usually impossible, because a vast majority of it is hogwash, each case is different and each case has its own unique set of facts. So, there is a lot more to this than has been written here, and the very best thing to do is to go see a criminal defense attorney for a discussion in private, and preferably someone who has decades of experience.
Tough question here because you are mixing several questions into one. (a) Does an attorney have to inform the client if he/she doesn't believe him? The answer to that is NO. The job of an attorney isn't believing a client. The job of an attorney is to zealously advocate for their client in a moral and ethical way. Believing you isn't part of that equation; (b) however, you then state that the lawyer isn't investigating things you are bringing to his/her attention. That becomes a problem. As I stated, the job of an attorney is to zealously advocate. If a lawyer is blatantly ignoring good leads just because of a hunch that you're a liar then that could be a serious issue with regard to their passion or their due diligence in the case at bar. This answer is further complicated by trial strategy decisions that are primarily up to the attorney. If you are making suggestions that could jeopardize the integrity of the case then a good lawyer may intentionally steer you away from those areas. Without more information however, giving you a definite answer to this question is difficult.
This issue is pretty common on appeal, in what we call matters involving post conviction relief. Basically, once a client has been found guilty of a crime, that client may appeal any legal issues in the case. Once that appeal is lost, the client may then claim "ineffective assistance of counsel" (pursuant to Rule 3.850).
Now, your question directly relates to zillions of appeals regarding the ineffectiveness of an attorney who refuses to pursue matters that the client shared with the attorney. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND that this person make his request IN WRITING. By having this request in writing, a future appeals court will be more inclined to believe that the request was made of the attorney, and the attorney failed to follow through. Without proof, the attorney may simply claim that he/she was never told to investigate x, y, or z.
Take Care.
Your friends and family can believe you. Your attorney is supposed to defend you. What a jury or judge will believe is the question for the attorney. You can probably get a cheap inexperienced attorney to believe you but that probably increases your chances of going to prison or getting other bad result.
As has been stated above, an attorney has no obligation or duty to inform clients of their own personal beliefs or thoughts. However, if that gets in the way of zealously representing a client then there can be an issue. With that said, attorneys are professionals who are trained in law. Lawyers should listen to their clients but the client should also heed advice from their lawyer.
