Readings for Class on 9/15 & 9/22

You should read KRPC 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1.

You should read:

ABA Comm. on Ethics Opinion 1273, 20 Nov. 1973
In re Bloom, 745 P.2d 61 (Cal. 1987)
Attorney Grievance Comm. v. Protokowicz, 619 A.2d 100 (Md. 1993)
Iowa Sup. Ct. Bd. of Prof. Ethics v. Hill, 576 N.W.2d 91 (Iowa 1988)
Lucas v. Hamm, 364 P.2d 685 (Cal.1961)
Woodruff v. Tomlin, 616 F.2d 924 (6th Cir.1980)
People v. Belge, 83 Misc. 2d 186 (Co.Cty. 1975)
N.Y. State Ethics Opinion 479 (1978)

Suggested Reading:

Hoeflich, "Legal Ethics in the 19th Century...," in Sources of the American Law of Lawyering (2007)

Problem:

You receive a call from another lawyer asking you to represent John Doe, who has recently been arrested and charged with terrorism in connection with an explosion at a shopping mall which resulted in the deaths of 140 men, women and children. The prosecution intends to seek the death penalty. Doe has told the other lawyer that he wants to plead not guilty, even though the case against him is strong enough to make the death penalty a likely sentence because this is the only way he can get media coverage for his cause; i.e. he wants to be a martyr. You are opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances. First question: may you refuse the case? Second question, if you accept the case, may you, against your client's wishes, enter a plea on his behalf of guilty but insane, which would guarantee that he would not be executed but would deny him a hance to speak in court, publicize his cause, and martyr himself?

This question is based loosely on the Unibomber case.

Don't forget to check for Kansas cases relevant to 1.1-1.4 and 2.1 in the Kansas case listings in MetaJuris.