Opinion ID: 683810
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Refusal to allow Spencer's Attorney to Testify

Text: 22 The Defendants next argue they were denied the opportunity to call Spencer's attorney, John J. Connors, Jr. (Connors). The Defendants claim they wanted to call Connors in order to rebut Spencer's testimony and deny the government's implication Dunn and Ward conspired with Connors to keep Spencer silent. They assert they were prevented from calling Connors to testify because of the district court's ethical warning to Connors. 23 After Spencer changed his plea, the district court reminded Connors of his ethical responsibilities under the attorney-client privilege. This privilege requires Connors not disclose any information shared by his client during the course of his representation. 24 The Defendant's were not prejudiced by this warning nor by the failure of Connors to testify. Defendant's counsel never made any attempt to call Connors to the stand during the trial. The district court placed no limitation on Connors's ability to testify. The only limitation placed on Connors was a reminder of his ethical obligation to his client which prevented him from sharing any confidential information he may have learned from Spencer during the course of his representation. 25