A recent federal court decision has made something very clear. Information you share with a general AI chatbot is not protected by attorney-client privilege. In United States v. Heppner, a federal court held that documents created through an AI chatbot and later given to defense counsel were not privileged and could be obtained by the government.
If you are facing criminal charges or working with a lawyer, this ruling has serious implications. Sharing confidential facts, documents, or legal strategy with a non-legal AI tool can jeopardize privilege and potentially harm your case.
Below, we explain what the court decided and what you should do to protect yourself.
What Did the Federal Court Decide?
In United States v. Heppner, the defendant used a consumer AI chatbot (Anthropic’s Claude) to generate documents related to his defense. He later gave those AI-generated materials to his lawyers. The defendant argued they were protected by attorney-client privilege and the attorney work-product doctrine.
The court rejected that argument.
The judge explained:
- Communications with an AI chatbot are not communications with an attorney.
- AI platforms are third-party services and are not part of the attorney-client relationship.
- Providing AI-generated materials to your lawyer after the fact does not transform them into privileged communications.
Because the information was shared with a third party that is not obligated to maintain attorney-client confidentiality, privilege did not apply.
Understanding Attorney-Client Privilege
Attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between a client and a lawyer made for the purpose of seeking legal advice.
There are three key elements:
- There must be a lawyer-client relationship.
- The communication must be confidential.
- The purpose must be to obtain legal advice.
If confidential information is shared with a third party who is not necessary to the legal representation, privilege can be waived. Courts have long held that once confidentiality is broken, the protection is lost.
An AI chatbot is not your lawyer. It is a technology platform operated by a company. When you input information into a general AI tool, you are sharing it with that company’s system. That breaks the confidentiality required for privilege.
Important Warning: Do Not Share Case Details With General AI Tools
This is critical for anyone involved in a criminal investigation or prosecution.
Do not:
- Upload police reports.
- Paste witness statements.
- Describe alleged conduct in detail.
- Share defense strategy.
- Upload evidence or discovery materials.
General AI tools are not protected by attorney-client privilege. Even if the platform says it values privacy, that is not the same as legal privilege.
If you later give those AI-generated summaries or strategy documents to your lawyer, they may still be discoverable by the prosecution.
What About Work Product?
Some people assume that materials prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected under the attorney work-product doctrine.
The problem in the recent case was that the defendant used AI independently. The materials were not prepared by or at the direction of counsel. The court determined that the work-product doctrine did not shield those documents either.
If you independently generate legal strategy using a chatbot before discussing it with your lawyer, you may not be protected.
Practical Guidance for Clients
If you are charged with a crime in Prince George’s, Charles, Calvert, or St. Mary’s Counties, protecting privilege should be one of your top priorities.
Here is what you should do:
- Speak directly with your attorney about sensitive facts.
- Use secure communication channels recommended by your lawyer.
- Avoid uploading documents or discussing your case on public platforms.
- Do not attempt to “prepare” your defense through consumer AI tools.
Think of AI chatbots as public research tools. They can explain general legal concepts, but they are not a confidential space for discussing your case.
Practical Guidance for Attorneys
Lawyers should educate clients about the risks of using consumer AI platforms for case preparation.
Engagement letters should include warnings about sharing case information with third-party AI tools. Clients often assume that technology is private simply because it feels personal. That assumption is legally dangerous.
If a law firm chooses to use AI tools internally, it should evaluate contractual protections, data handling policies, and confidentiality safeguards. Even then, privilege issues must be carefully analyzed.
The Bottom Line
The federal court’s decision reinforces a basic but important rule. Attorney-client privilege protects communications between you and your lawyer. It does not protect communications between you and an AI chatbot.
Information or documents shared with non-legal specific AI tools are not protected by attorney-client privilege. Sharing sensitive case details with those tools can waive privilege and expose materials to prosecutors.
If you are facing criminal charges, the safest approach is simple. Keep confidential information between you and your attorney. Do not experiment with your defense strategy on consumer AI platforms.
If you have questions about preserving attorney-client privilege or are facing charges in Southern Maryland, contact Southern Maryland Criminal Defense to discuss your situation confidentially.
Need a real attorney? SoMD Criminal Defense offers free consultations in Waldorf, La Plata, Calvert County, St. Mary’s County, and Prince George’s County. Learn about the cost of hiring a criminal defense lawyer.
