UT: No IAC for not objecting to recording of jail phone calls for spousal privilege

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not raising spousal privilege to recorded jail telephone calls since there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in the calls where spousal privilege in this context hadn’t been raised before in the state. State v. Samora, 2021 UT App 29, 2021 Utah App. LEXIS 30 (Mar. 18, 2021).

“Contrary to defendant’s contentions, the warrants for her vehicle and residence were supported by the requisite probable cause and the hearsay information of a confidential informant (CI) used in the search warrant applications satisfied both prongs of the Aguilar-Spinelli test. The reliability of the CI was established by the officers’ statements that the CI had given credible and accurate information in the past …, and the CI’s basis of knowledge was established because the police investigation corroborated the information provided by the CI ….” People v. Colon, 2021 NY Slip Op 01652, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1742 (4th Dept. Mar. 19, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay, Privileges. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.