## Facts

- A criminal defendant charged with murder was represented by defense attorneys Francis R. Belge and Frank H. Armani and asserted an insanity defense.
- In confidential consultations aimed at preparing the defense, the client admitted involvement in additional murders and disclosed the location of one victim’s body.
- Belge investigated the client’s statements, located the body in a cemetery, and personally viewed the remains.
- Belge did not notify law enforcement or other authorities about the body’s location.
- After the information surfaced during the client’s murder trial, a grand jury indicted Belge for alleged violations of New York Public Health Law:
  - A provision requiring that the dead receive a “decent burial” (Public Health Law § 4200).
  - A provision requiring reporting of a death occurring without medical attendance (Public Health Law § 4143).
- The trial court dismissed the indictment on the ground that attorney-client privilege and confidentiality protected Belge’s conduct; the prosecution appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether attorney-client privilege attached to the client’s disclosures to defense counsel about an uncharged killing and the location of the victim’s body when made to advance the client’s interests in a pending criminal case.
2. Whether the privilege and confidentiality precluded imposing criminal liability on counsel under Public Health Law §§ 4200 and 4143 for failing to report the death or ensure burial.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed the order dismissing the indictment.
- The court held that attorney-client privilege attached to the communications to the extent they were made to advance the client’s interests in the criminal representation.
- The privilege operated to shield the attorney from liability for conduct that would otherwise violate the cited Public Health Law provisions.
- The court noted the privilege is not unlimited and that other cases may present competing considerations, but concluded dismissal was proper on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of obtaining legal assistance in a criminal defense are privileged.
- When statutory reporting or burial duties would require disclosure of privileged information obtained in the course of representation, the privilege may bar criminal prosecution of defense counsel for nondisclosure.
- Attorney-client privilege is not absolute; courts may recognize the possibility of conflicting considerations in different factual settings.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that because the body’s location was learned through privileged defense communications made to further the client’s interests, the state could not prosecute defense counsel under general public health reporting and burial statutes for failing to disclose that information, and the indictment was properly dismissed.


People v. Belge, 376 N.Y.S.2d 771 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep’t 1975)