{"id":11844,"date":"2026-02-25T07:30:11","date_gmt":"2026-02-25T15:30:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844"},"modified":"2026-02-25T07:30:11","modified_gmt":"2026-02-25T15:30:11","slug":"attorney-client-communication-during-an-overnight-break","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844","title":{"rendered":"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break"},"content":{"rendered":"

When a defendant in a criminal case chooses to testify, and there is an overnight break in the middle of the testimony, can the trial judge forbid the lawyer to talk to the client about the testimony, even while allowing discussion of other topics?<\/p>\n

Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court held today in\u00a0Villareal v. Texas<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

The decision drew the line between two bookend cases,\u00a0Geders v. United States<\/em><\/a> (1976) and\u00a0Perry v. Leeke<\/em><\/a> (1989).<\/p>\n

Geders<\/em> disapproved a court order prohibiting any communication during an overnight recess.\u00a0Perry<\/em> upheld a court order doing so during a brief daytime recess.<\/p>\n

The court rejected “Villareal’s hardline position\u2014that the Sixth Amendment permits no restriction of a defendant\u2019s consultation right during an overnight recess\u2014[which] fails to account for the content-related premises underlying Geders<\/em> and Perry<\/em>.”<\/p>\n

By contrast, Texas\u2019s reading\u2014and now ours\u2014gives content to Perry<\/em>\u2019s framework: What shifts is the protection afforded to a certain subset of consultation. That subset, we hold, is discussion of testimony for its own sake\u2014what Perry called \u201cnothing but the testimony.\u201d Id<\/em>., at 284. A defense attorney may rehearse her client\u2019s testimony before her client takes the witness stand. See ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Formal Opinion 508: The Ethics of Witness Preparation 1\u20134 (Aug.5, 2023) (Formal Opinion 508). And a defense attorney may debrief her client\u2019s testimony after her client leaves the witness stand for good. Such discussion of testimony qua<\/em> testimony is entirely proper and the consultation that enables it is constitutionally protected before the defendant\u2019s testimony begins and after it concludes. But for the duration of the defendant\u2019s time on the stand, consultation about the testimony itself\u2014rather than incidental discussion of testimony in service of protected topics\u2014sheds its constitutional protection.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The court was unanimous in the result. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, concurred only in the result, not the opinion. He criticized Justice Jackson’s opinion for the court for going too far outside the actual case and deciding matters not presented.<\/p>\n

I am unable to join the majority opinion because it unnecessarily expands these precedents. It purports to \u201cannounce\u201d a \u201crule\u201d under which a defendant has a constitutional right to \u201cdiscussion of testimony\u201d so long as that discussion is \u201cincidental to other topics.\u201d Ante, at 9, 11, 12, n. 5. It identifies new circumstances, not presented here, in which a defendant supposedly has a right to discuss matters related to his ongoing testimony. Ante<\/em>, at 9\u201310, 12. And it endorses a methodology under which \u201cany conflict between the Sixth Amendment and the desire for untutored testimony must \u2018be resolved in favor of the right to the assistance and guidance of counsel.\u2019 \u201d Ante<\/em>, at 12.<\/p>\n

\u00a0*\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 *\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 *<\/p>\n

The majority opinion does not claim that its approach finds any support in the original meaning of the Sixth Amendment. The majority also does not claim that opining on matters not presented by the facts was necessary to decide this case, which involved an order that all agree was constitutional.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Justice Alito did join the opinion but wrote a separate concurrence setting out what he believes to be the correct framework for analyzing these issues.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When a defendant in a criminal case chooses to testify, and there is an overnight break in the middle of the testimony, can the trial judge forbid the lawyer to talk to the client about the testimony, even while allowing discussion of other topics? Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court held today in\u00a0Villareal v. Texas. The decision drew the line between two bookend cases,\u00a0Geders v. United States (1976) and\u00a0Perry v. Leeke (1989).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,56],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11844","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-counsel","category-u-s-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAttorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"When a defendant in a criminal case chooses to testify, and there is an overnight break in the middle of the testimony, can the trial judge forbid the lawyer to talk to the client about the testimony, even while allowing discussion of other topics? Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court held today in\u00a0Villareal v. Texas. The decision drew the line between two bookend cases,\u00a0Geders v. United States (1976) and\u00a0Perry v. Leeke (1989).\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Crime & Consequences\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-02-25T15:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kent Scheidegger\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844\",\"name\":\"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-02-25T15:30:11+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/\",\"name\":\"Crime & Consequences\",\"description\":\"Crime and criminal law\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356\",\"name\":\"Kent Scheidegger\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.cjlf.org\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences","og_description":"When a defendant in a criminal case chooses to testify, and there is an overnight break in the middle of the testimony, can the trial judge forbid the lawyer to talk to the client about the testimony, even while allowing discussion of other topics? Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court held today in\u00a0Villareal v. Texas. The decision drew the line between two bookend cases,\u00a0Geders v. United States (1976) and\u00a0Perry v. Leeke (1989).","og_url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844","og_site_name":"Crime & Consequences","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/CriminalJusticeLegalFoundation\/","article_published_time":"2026-02-25T15:30:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":400,"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/FB_DefaultLJ.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Kent Scheidegger","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kent Scheidegger","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844","name":"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break - Crime & Consequences","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-02-25T15:30:11+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?p=11844#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Attorney-Client Communication During an Overnight Break"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/","name":"Crime & Consequences","description":"Crime and criminal law","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/#\/schema\/person\/1ab62da9ed4ddd3a58d70c77eef37356","name":"Kent Scheidegger","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.cjlf.org"],"url":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11844","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11844"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11844\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11845,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11844\/revisions\/11845"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11844"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11844"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.crimeandconsequences.blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11844"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}