High court asked to overturn murder conviction

CARSON CITY -- An attorney for death-row inmate Charles Manley asked the state Supreme Court Thursday to overturn the murder conviction, claiming Manley's attorney-client confidentiality privilege was violated at his Las Vegas trial.

Defense attorney David Schieck said Manley never waived his right to keep private the talks between himself and his trial lawyers.

But Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent said the defense opened the door at the trial by asking Manley about conservations with his lawyers. And District Judge Sally Loehrer determined the attorney-client privileged was waived.

The court took arguments under submission but Justice Bill Maupin said he was concerned about the question of waiving the privilege. He said "there must be protection in law" of this right, which holds conversations between a lawyer and his client are not to be divulged unless the client agrees.

Manley, now 52, was convicted of the fatal shooting of his live-in companion Roxanne Logan and stealing her Ford pickup in March 1995 in Clark County. Testimony at the trial showed Logan, a remedial reading teacher, became disenchanted with Manley because she was supporting him and he was using the money to drink.

After the shooting, Manley fled to California, where he consulted an attorney. He agreed to surrender and return to Las Vegas. His trial attorneys filed an alibi notice that Manley was in California at the time of the killing.

But evidence, including DNA testing, bloody fingerprints and blood on his clothing, mounted. And that defense was not used. Manley then said the shooting was accidental.

Schieck, who was not the trial lawyer, said in his pre-hearing brief that the cross examination by the prosecution about the conversations between Manley and his attorney Mark Wolf should not have been permitted. The questioning, Schieck said was done "to imply that Manley was not testifying truthfully because he (Manley) had not told his attorneys various pieces of information that came out during his testimony ..."

Schieck said the prosecution also sought "to further imply that Manley and his attorney were trying to lie to the jury when the notice of alibi was filed," referring to the defense that Manley was not present at the shooting.

Manley, while he was on the stand at the trial, was questioned by his lawyer Wolf about conservations they had about talking to authorities, surrendering and jumping bail.

Laurent said that opened the door for the prosecution to probe further into the conservations. "When he takes the stand, he runs the risk," Laurent argued. If anything, he said this was "harmless error" that does not merit the reversal of the conviction.

"A complete waiver of the private conservation between the defendant and his attorney Wolf occurred during defendant's direct examination," Laurent said in his pre-hearing brief.

archive