Using Probation in Disciplinary Proceedings
Drugs and alcohol are problems for lawyers. The evidence is clear that many problems come from addictions. The Indiana Supreme Court and Disciplinary Commission recognizes that reality with greater frequency. Take Marla Muse’s case as an example. The facts are sketchy in the opinion, but they start with a plea of Guilty to Possession of Marijuana as a Class D Felony.
RPC Rule 8.4(b) states that “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s … fitness…” Ms. Muse agreed that she violated that standard. The court’s sanction is as follows:
For Respondent’s professional misconduct, the Court suspends Respondent from the practice of law for a period of 180 days, beginning February 15, 2013, with 30 days actively served and the remainder stayed subject to completion of at least two years of probation. The Court incorporates by reference the terms and conditions of probation set forth in the parties’ Conditional Agreement, which include:(1) Respondent shall maintain complete abstinence from mind-altering drugs during her probation.(2) Respondent shall have no violations of the criminal law of this state or the Rules of Professional Conduct during her probation.(3) If Respondent violates her probation or the JLAP monitoring agreement, the Commission will petition to revoke her probation and request the balance of the stayed suspension be actively served without automatic reinstatement, and Respondent may be reinstated only through the procedures of Admission and Discipline Rule 23(4) and (18).
It seems that a period of probation, working with JLAP in a well monitored probation program will do more to protect the clients of Ms. Muse than any longer suspension and return to the profession without requiring some assistance. *
How bad can one lawyer get?
Amy McTeer had it bad for the guy. Amy was a criminal defense lawyer, who forgot that you want to be sure at the end of the case it is the client who goes to jail. She worked hard, and got him out of jail, the illegal way – she helped him escape. To compound matters she posted photos on Facebook of her out with the escapee. She was arrested in 2011 for these matters, and the Oklahoma Supremes finally accepted her resignation of her license.
The whole sordid story, drugs and troubles can be found here.
Did you realize that if you get busted in one state for ethical violations, it can carry over to other states where you are licensed?
In the matter of Mark J. A. Hughes, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge accepted a consent agreement between Hughes and the State Bar and ordered him disbarred.
In three cases, the State Bar charged that Hughes revealed information relating to the representation of a client without informed consent, engaged in conflicts of interest and failed to take steps to protect his client’s interests upon termination of representation. The State Bar also alleged that Hughes failed to maintain confidences and preserve the secrets of his client, engaged in unprofessional conduct, and made disparaging, offensive, and provocative comments and accusations about his client and client’s family members in their presence. Finally, the State Bar charged that Hughes engaged in the unauthorized practice of law while suspended. Hughes agreed not to contest any of the charges.
As a result of the consent agreement, the Presiding Disciplinary Judge issued an order on May 1, 2012, declaring Mark J. A. Hughes’ disbarment. Hughes must pay $1,202 for all costs and expenses associated with the State Bar of Arizona’s investigation.
The Indiana Supreme Court sent Hughes a Rule to Show Cause why similar treatment should not occur here in Indiana. The standard under the A&D Rule 23(28)(c) is that similar treatment should occur here. No reply as to why it should not.
* The author is a JLAP volunteer.