Khodaverdian Sierra_GRADED_ Ethics Assignment #1

proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law. It is likely that Lisa would not have been was not obligated to provide the officer with any information regarding the ring under 1.2 (d) because she is merely investigating what Dolly told her . Dolly told Lisa that when she entered the jail, she threw the ring into a trash can by the jail’s front door. Lisa did not counsel or assist Dolly in committing a crime . R but r ather , she cho o se to verify whether what she was told the information was actually true. One may argue that Lisa was obligated to tell the officer any information she knew about the ring because otherwise she would be assisting Dolly with her crime. However, this argument fails as would fail because Lisa did not counsel Dolly to hide or get rid of the ring nor did she assist in the concealment of the ring. Accordingly, it is likely that Lisa did not violate 1.2(d) when she did not disclose anything to the officer. II. Confidentiality of information under Model Rule 1.6 regarding the shirt. See Above for Rule Confidential communication under Model Rule 1.6 and Lisa has counseled Dolly not to destroy evidence. It is likely that Lisa should could have disclosed information to the law enforcement official about the sweatshirt , which Dolly tore into strips , because of under one of the exception s to 1.6. Dolly communicated confidential information to L when she told Lisa that she had hidden the stolen sweatshirt in her cell which was only occupied by her . Lisa acted in compliance with her ethical obli gations because she did not counsel her to conceal or destroy evidence, instead she advised her to do nothing else to hide or destroy evidence to which Dolly agreed. Although this was a confidential communication between the two , an exception 1.6(b)(1) applies and exists for Lisa to disclose and thus 1.6 would not be in violat violation of MR 1.6 if she disclosed the information. ed. Exception to Rule 1.6 allowing Lisa to disclose? If you had not provided the rule abov e, this is where you would include the 1.6(b)(1) exception. It is likely that Lisa should have disclosed information regarding the sweater because doing so would potentially prevent serious bodily harm or certain death (1.6 (b)(1)). Lisa is was aware that Dolly is unstable because , this is supported by the fact that Dolly admit ted that she s used to using a weapon ( Swiss army knife ) during the attack but yet she does did not remember harming the victim due to (she states she has amnesia ) . In addition, Dolly discloses disclosed that she tore the sweatshirt into strips which she planned to burn. These facts support the belief that Dolly would harm the cellmate. The harm to the cellmate would be imminent because Accordingly, there is uncertainty surrounding whether Dolly poses a threat to others and Lisa had overheard from the guard sitting at the front desk stating that a cellmate would be coming in the morning. On balance, Thus, her Lisa’s knowledge of Dolly’s mental state, as well as this new variable, and along with Dolly’s statement about burning the sweatshirt is a cause for concern would give Lisa grounds to reveal the information . Accordingly, Lisa would not violate 1.6 and should have told the appropriate law enforcement officer about the Sweatshirt as a precautionary measure to