Friday, February 26, 2010
The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board affirmed a panel order reinstating an attorney suspended for an indecent exposure conviction. There had been a series of disciplinary orders involving similar conduct. The board majority noted that there had been testimony presented that was "highly critical" of the petitioner. The judge and prosecutor in the criminal case disagreed concerning his fitness to practice (the judge had unfavorable views). There had been evidence of treatment for his personal issues and the board majority noted that the panel below had acted favorably on the petition.
Three board members disagreed, noting a pattern of conduct and expressing the view that the reinstatement decision "must be based on more than a guess and a hope that a transformation has occurred." (Mike Frisch)