You are working as a federal law clerk in the federal court in Phoenix, Arizona. The case of Stewart v. Arizona has recently come on the docket. Stewart is currently sitting in prison in Arizona. He came to be there through the following facts:In early 2014, a rash of seemingly related murders ravaged the area of Flagstaff, Arizona. Police soon announced that they were on the hunt for a serial killer. On March 14, 2014, Stewart retained the services of Careful and Cautious, LLP, a law firm in Flagstaff to help with his legal troubles. During the initial consultation, Stewart told James Careful the following:Well, Mr. Careful, the truth is that I’m behind the six recent murders in the area. I’m really a good guy and I hate to kill people. But sometimes, I just can’t help myself. I don’t want to continue killing people but these voices in my head… they’re just so logical and irresistible.James Careful promptly called the local police and reported his conversation with Stewart. Stewart was arrested for capital murder. A later search of his house turned up the murder weapon in two of the cases and files on Stewart’s computer that contained information on two more victims. Stewart was put on trial in the fall of 2014. At trial, Stewart was represented by a public defense attorney, and James Careful testified against him. Careful related the entire March 14 conversation to the jury. After a three week trial, Stewart was found guilty of six counts of capital murder and was sentenced to death. He summarily appealed his sentence. Two months ago, the Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal.Stewart, through his new appointed attorneys (paid for by a non-profit anti-death penalty organization), has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the federal district court for the District of Arizona. Among other arguments, Stewart claims that his rights were violated by Arizona because information and testimony was used against him that related to his confidential discussions with his then attorney, James Careful. The state claims that the use of the confidential communication with his attorney was proper in this case.Joe Judge asks you to research applicable law and to write an essay discussing whether the use of Careful’s information and testimony regarding his conversation with Stewart violated Stewart’s rights. Mr. Judge tells you that since you’re in the 9th Circuit court of appeals’ jurisdiction, cases from the 9th Circuit would be best. However, cases from other circuits are better than nothing and can be used in a pinch.Please prepare the requested essay.An IRAC-style essay is appropriate for this assignment.

Week Three Case: Devereaux-Dering Group, Chapter 10, Page 320 This assignment must be submitted by Sunday 11:59 PMPlease submit by clicking the assignment link above.Directions: Write a short summary of the case, and then answer all of the questions at the end of the case. Always use APA references and in-text citations. The assignment must be written in APA format with Running head, header, page numbers, Title page, Times New Roman 12 pt font, double spaced and indented paragraphs, citations at the end of every paragraph to support what is shared, and a complete APA reference page. The summary portion should not exceed one page. Please read the case about three times before attempting to answer any question and you will find you get a better understanding of what is being asked of you. Please be sure to back up your answers with facts from the textbook, and put together complete and well thought out responses. I am looking for original input so, please integrate your thoughts and experiences in each case assignment. Also make sure that you support and reinforce your answers and replies with factual information from the textbook, research, work/life experiences, etc. Also, answer the questions completely. Quality counts, so be brief, but thorough and to the point.