- Court: Oregon Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Post-Conviction Relief
- Date Filed: 05-30-2014
- Case #: S061072
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Baldwin, J. for the Court; En Banc
- Full Text Opinion
Longo appealed the post-conviction court's denial of his motion for a protective order regarding privileged lawyer-client communication. Longo was convicted of aggravated murder and sentenced to death. Following the conviction, Longo sought post-conviction relief for inadequate and ineffective assistence of counsel. The State filed a motion to compel Longo to produce all documents related to the capital murder case. Longo filed a motion for a protective order to prevent the State from disclosing privileged communication related to the capital murder case to third parties, specifically future prosecution of the case. The post-conviction court denied the motion. Longo appealed and argued that the protective order should be issued. The Court first concluded that a writ of mandamus is appropriate if the post-conviction court had a duty to prevent the disclosure of the privileged communication. The Court then concluded under the lawyer-client privilege, Longo could refuse disclosure of any confidential communication. The Court found that the post-conviction court erred by failing to protect the privileged communication by denying the protective order, and that mandamus is an appropriate remedy. The Court directed the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the post-conviction court to issue a protective order. Peremptory write of mandamus to issue.