UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

On May 7, 2018, Kanee Goode filed a pro se motion to vacate her sentence under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255. (ECF No. 280.) She claims defense counsel was constitutionally ineffective in numerous 

respects, including that “counsel failed to file a notice of appeal after sentencing.” (Id.) The Court 

ordered the government to file a response (ECF No. 283), the government did so (ECF No. 287), 

and the Court ordered an evidentiary hearing limited to the issue of whether Goode’s trial counsel 

ignored Goode’s instruction to file a notice of appeal (ECF No. 289). Now, the government has 

filed a motion asking to waive attorney-client privilege so that the government can interview 

Goode’s counsel about the ineffective assistance of counsel claim she raises. (ECF No. 293.) 

“To be sure, litigants cannot hide behind the [attorney-client] privilege if they are relying 

upon privileged communications to make their case.” In re Lott, 424 F.3d 446, 454 (6th Cir. 2005). 

Thus, the attorney-client privilege “may be implicitly waived by claiming ineffective assistance of 

counsel or by otherwise raising issues regarding counsel’s performance.” Id. at 452–53. But 

“[i]mplied waivers are consistently construed narrowly,” and “[c]ourts must impose a waiver no 

broader than needed to ensure the fairness of the proceedings before it.” Id. at 453 (internal 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 

v. 

 

KANEE GOODE, 

 Defendant. 

Case No. 15-20007 

Honorable Laurie J. Michelson 

ORDER GRANTING GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO WAIVE 

ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE [293] 

Case 2:15-cr-20007-LJM-DRG ECF No. 294, PageID.4332 Filed 12/04/18 Page 1 of 2
2 

quotation marks and citations omitted). Thus, “the waiver in habeas cases should be limited to the 

extent necessary to litigate a petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims.” Id. at 454 

(quoting Mason v. Mitchell, 293 F.Supp. 2d 819, 823–24 (N.D. Ohio 2003). 

Here, the government asks to waive Goode’s attorney-client privilege, “so that the 

government can conduct an interview of trial counsel and obtain any necessary information . . . 

limited to the issues presented in claim One of the § 2255 petition.” (ECF No. 293, PageID.4328.) 

The Court finds that the government’s request is necessary to litigate Goode’s ineffective 

assistance of counsel claim and that this narrow waiver is no broader than necessary. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the government’s motion to have the court 

waive the attorney/client privilege is GRANTED to the extent that the government will be 

permitted to question Goode’s counsel limited to the issues of effective assistance of counsel raised 

in Goode’s § 2255 petition. 

SO ORDERED. 

s/Laurie J. Michelson 

LAURIE J. MICHELSON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Date: December 4, 2018 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record 

and/or pro se parties on this date, December 4, 2018, using the Electronic Court Filing system 

and/or first-class U.S. mail. 

s/William Barkholz 

Case Manager 

Case 2:15-cr-20007-LJM-DRG ECF No. 294, PageID.4333 Filed 12/04/18 Page 2 of 2