People v. Trutenko

The State sought interlocutory review of the trial court’s findings that communications between the defendant, a former assistant state’s attorney, and a colleague were protected by attorney-client privilege. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that defendant and his colleague, who were both attorneys at the time were not an attorney and a client and that any attorney-client privilege, to the extent it existed, would have belonged to the state’s attorneys office and that the office had waived any privilege it may have been able to assert in order to pursue a criminal probe of the defendant’s conduct while employed as an assistant state’s attorney. The court further explained a public official may not use a government lawyer to shield evidence of alleged wrongdoing. (HOWSE and MIKVA, concurring)