Colorado Supreme Court finds that because a child who is the subject of a D&N proceeding is not the client of a court-appointed GAL, neither the statutory attorney–client privilege nor ethical rules governing an attorney’s obligations of confidentiality to a client strictly apply to communications by the child. The NACC filed an amicus curiae brief in this case in support of the court of appeals decision that the child’s communications with the GAL fell within the attorney–client privilege.
No. 08SC945. People v. Gabriesheski.
Available at: http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=8255&courtid=2