Cited by

Adel, 252 Ariz. at 360–61 ¶ 13; –40 ¶ 8 (2020).

¶ 8; (existence of attorney-client relationship required to show privilege).

¶19 The first question we address is whether Belsanti “has satisfied ‘the burden of making a prima facie showing that the privilege applies to a specific communication.’” McGlothlin, 255 Ariz. at 457 ¶ 22 (–40 ¶ 8 (2020)).

¶20 This Court recently set out a framework for analyzing whether a –40 ¶ 8 (2020).

¶ 1 (2020) (requiring “‘a factual basis adequate to support a good faith belief by a reasonable person’ that in camera review of 2 Defendant argues that this court lacks jurisdiction to review the ruling on the motion to compel under Michael Weller, Inc. v. Aetna Cas.

¶15 The Arizona Supreme Court has said, “the court may not invade the privilege to determine its existence, even in camera using a special master.” ¶ 1 (2020) (emphasis added).

To determine whether a particular communication is privileged, the court must consider whether, at the time the communication was made, “the client reasonably understood the communication to be confidential.” ¶ 11 (2020) (cleaned up).

–40 ¶ 8 (2020) (requiring that privileged attorney-client communication be made “to secure or provide legal advice” and “in confidence”).

¶ 7 (2020) (“The attorney-client privilege arises from .

lege and Arizona Rule of Evidence (“Rule”) 408.2 ¶20 To establish a communication is privileged, the party claiming the privilege must show (1) “an attorney-client relationship,” (2) that “the communication was made to secure or provide legal advice,” (3) that “the communication was made in confidence,” and (4) that “the communication was treated as confidential.” ¶ 8 (2020) (citation omitted).

of Pima, ¶ 1 (2020) (quoting U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 572 (1989) (cleaned up).

¶ 1 (2020) (recognizing that attorney-client privilege is waived if the record has reasonable evidence to support a good faith belief that an exception to the privilege applies).

For text messages sent before that date and time, this court remands for further proceedings to resolve the “fact specific” -41 ¶¶ 9–18 (2020).1 FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 Beasley is awaiting trial on various felony charges, including first degree murder where the State is seeking the death penalty.