Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Ingram (D) and McPartlin (D1) were indicted and tried for numerous violations of the Travel Act and the Wire Radio Act and a conspiracy to violate those acts. Ds hired different attorneys. Throughout the period covered by the indictment, Benton kept diaries, or appointment calendars, in which he made notes concerning meetings and telephone conversations, naming the persons involved and often recording the substance of the conversations. The Benton diaries figured prominently in P's case, for they corroborated much of his testimony. Benton's credibility was an important issue for all the defendants. D and D1's attorneys cooperated in that effort to discredit Benton. An investigator acting for D's counsel twice interviewed D1 with the consent of the latter's counsel to determine a basis for challenging Benton’s diary entries. In the second of these interviews, D1 made certain statements, which D argues tend to support his defense. At trial, when D offered evidence of these statements, D1's counsel objected on the ground of the attorney-client privilege, and the court, after an In camera hearing, sustained the objection on this and another ground. The court sustained D1’s objection and Ds were convicted, and Ds appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co