Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 20,000 case briefs (and counting) keyed to over 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]

In re Ryder | 263 F. Supp. 360 (1967)

The fruit of a crime is something that’s taken or obtained through the crime. The instrumentality of a crime is something used to commit the crime. In an armed bank robbery, for example, the stolen money is the fruit. The gun is the instrumentality. In the case In re Ryder, we explore whether it’s ethical for an attorney to conceal the fruit or instrumentality of a client’s crime.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, or F B I, suspected Charles Cook of robbing a Virginia bank. The robber used a sawed-off shotgun. F B I agents interviewed Cook and confiscated three hundred forty-eight dollars from him. Cook hired attorney Richard Ryder to represent him.

Cook initially told Ryder that he didn’t rob the bank. After speaking with the F B I, Ryder learned that some of the cash confiscated from Cook could be traced to the robbery. Cook then told Ryder that a man had paid him to deposit a package in a lockbox at Richmond National Bank. Ryder didn’t believe Cook’s story.

Ryder had Cook execute a power of attorney and used it to access Cook’s lockbox. He found cash and a sawed-off shotgun. Ryder transferred the items to his own lockbox. Ryder intended to keep the cash and the gun pending Cook’s trial unless the government discovered them. Ryder’s purpose in taking the items was, at least in part, to destroy the presumption of guilt that would arise if the money and gun were found in Cook’s possession. If the government discovered the items in Ryder’s lockbox, he hoped to exclude them from evidence based on the attorney-client privilege.

Cook was indicted for the bank robbery. Several days later, the F B I searched both Cook’s and Ryder’s lockboxes. Agents found the cash and shotgun in Ryder’s lockbox. The court removed Ryder as Cook’s counsel and suspended him from practicing before the court until further notice. The matter was referred to the United States attorney’s office, which charged Ryder with violating several provisions of the Virginia Canons of Professional Ethics. The district court then proceeded to hear the matter en banc.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]

The Quimbee App features over 20,000 case briefs keyed to over 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

свернуть