No, this is clear law already. If the defense attorneys could rat out the defendants, how would the defendants be able to trust and confide in their attorneys?
Personally, all the ethical quandaries would prevent me from doing criminal defense work except for someone I thought was innocent, but since I'm the only lawyer hanging out here at the moment I need to give you the "party line." 
Not much, unless the defendant "opts in" to a system like Florida has. Here's part of the Florida rule (3.220):
(d) Defendants Obligation.
(1) If a defendant elects to participate in discovery, either through filing the appropriate
notice or by participating in any discovery process, including the taking of a discovery deposition, the following disclosures shall be made:
(A) Within 15 days after receipt by the defendant of the Discovery Exhibit furnished
by the prosecutor pursuant to subdivision (b)(1)(A) of this rule, the defendant shall furnish to the prosecutor a written list of the names and addresses of all witnesses whom the defendant expects to call as witnesses at the trial or hearing. When the prosecutor subpoenas a witness whose name has been furnished by the defendant, except for trial subpoenas, the rules applicable to the taking of depositions shall apply.
(B) Within 15 days after receipt of the prosecutors Discovery Exhibit the defendant
shall serve a written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to and permit the prosecutor to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material that is in the defendants possession or control:
(i) the statement of any person listed in subdivision (d)(1)(A),
other than that of the defendant;
(ii) reports or statements of experts made in connection with the
particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons; and
(iii) any tangible papers or objects that the defendant intends to use in the
hearing or trial.
ullhair:
