Brief Fact Summary. The Appellant, Clark (the “Appellant”), was convicted of murder and sentenced to death for shooting his ex-wife with a .38 caliber revolver. The victim was killed in her bed at home.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Evidence relevant to an issue may be admissible over attorney client privilege even if it was obtained through eavesdropping by a third party.
It is equally true that under former OCGA § 24-4-6 , and present OCGA § 24-14-6 , in order to warrant a conviction based solely upon circumstantial evidence, the proven facts must be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt and must exclude every reasonable theory other than the guilt of the accused.View Full Point of Law
Issue. Did the court err in admitting the testimony of the telephone operator because the conversation she overheard was attorney-client privileged?
Did the trial court err in not charging the jury that Mr. Menchaca was an accomplice witness as a matter of law?
Held. Judge Morrison issued the opinion for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in holding that the trial court properly admitted the evidence of the telephone operator.
The witness was not an accomplice as a matter of law, and the court did not err in refusing to submit the issue to the jury.
Discussion. The conversation between the Appellant and his attorney was not in the usual course of preparing a legal defense. The Appellant was not seeking legitimate advice worthy of protection under the facts in this case.