Friday, March 18, 2011

Destination Hawaii

A District of Columbia Hearing Committee has recommended that a petition for reinstatement be denied:

Petitioner was convicted of crimes that strike at the very integrity of the legal profession and judicial system. As a court-appointed attorney, he was given access to an array of juvenile defendants; he admittedly engaged in grossly inappropriate behavior with a number of them, perhaps as many as twenty. His admitted actions ranged from fondling to oral and anal sex. His victims were particularly vulnerable to someone like Petitioner, who was generous to them. He was also able to exploit the power of his position--a fear that, if the victims did not succumb to his advances, Petitioner might lose interest in them as clients.

The petitioner was disbarred in 1981 for the criminal convictions. He sought reinstatement in order to apply for admission in Hawaii, where he owns a home. 

A remarkable part of the story told by the committee is petitioner's post-conviction admission to the Colorado Bar in 1990. Colorado held a hearing on his application but he eventually passed the character and fitness inquiry. The committee here finds that he falsely minimized his misconduct in the Colorado admission process, claiming that he had been convicted and disbarred as a result of his sexual orientation.

Bar Counsel agreed that he was presently competent to practice. The report details it's conclusion that he has failed to recognize and accept responsibility for his past actions in recommending that he not be reinstated in the District of Columbia.

To read the report, go to this link. The petitioner's name is Roger H. Moore. (Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Destination Hawaii:


I find the collateral attack on the Colorado proceedings perverse. Here is a hard fought proceeding in multiple forums yet the hearing committee feels that it can second guess the conclusions of that authority. How would this play if Colorado had come to the opposite conclusion and the applicant were to argue that the Colorado authorities hadn't conducted those proceedings appropriately?


Posted by: FixedWing | Mar 23, 2011 5:54:15 AM

Post a comment