Can a prosecutor cross-examine a defendant's attorney's cross-examination of defendant on the basis that it was his own idea to lie and claim self-defense?

1054." According to defendant's own testimony, it was his own idea to lie and claim self-defense, not his lawyer's. Since the prosecutor's cross-examination of defendant did not "presuppose a communication between attorney and client" and was, in fact, "answered without impliedly affirming that such conversation occurred," there was no violation of defendant's attorney-client privilege. (See Mitchell v. Superior Court, supra, 37 Cal.3d at p. 601.)

Finally, because there was no inquiry into any confidential communications and no violation of defendant's attorney-client privilege, the underlying premise of defendant's conflict of interest claim is erroneous and unsupported by the record. (People v. Doolin (2009) 45 Cal.4th 390, 417-422.)