In Re Gray

Good Law
123 Cal. App. 3d 614·176 Cal. Rptr. 721·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 2084
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1981Crim. 12705California961 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gardner, J.

J.— In this case we hold that the attorney-client privilege is waived as to matters put in issue in habeas corpus proceedings where the competency of defendant’s trial attorney is at issue.

Georgia Cassidy was found guilty of first degree murder and of conspiracy to commit extortion. She filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court alleging petitioner had failed to act in a manner to be expected of a reasonably competent attorney by failing to offer potentially meritorious defenses of diminished capacity or insanity. At the evidentiary hearing Georgia refused to waive the attorney-client privilege and objected to the petitioner testifying. Petitioner then declined to answer questions. The trial court found him in contempt. These proceedings resulted.

Evidence Code section 958 seems fairly clear on this subject: “There is no privilege under this article as to a communication relevant to an issue of breach, by the lawyer or by the client, of a duty arising out of the attorney-client relationship.”

The charge of inadequate representation clearly involves a charge of a breach of a duty arising out of the attorney-client relationship.

The comment of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.