On cross-examination the trial court, over repeated objection, allowed the District Attorney to question defendant not only as to whether he had conferred with his attorney about the case but as well as to the subject matter of their conversation, viz., the law of self-defense. We agree with the Appellate Division that the latter was error. The District Attorney plainly sought to probe defendants confidential discussions with his attorney on a matter which was the principal issue in the case and, by compelling defendant to admit that his attorney had informed him of the legal requirements of the justification defense, violated the attorney-client privilege.
