Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Double Dip

The Indiana Supreme Court approved a 180 day suspension without automatic reinstatement under the following circumstances:

Respondent was appointed to represent a client as his public defender in a criminal matter. Not aware of this, the client's father asked Respondent to represent the client. Respondent accepted $1,000 from the client's father and continued to represent the client as a public defender. Respondent did not return the $1,000 to the client's father...

The parties cite the following additional facts in aggravation: (1) Respondent's misconduct demonstrates a dishonest and selfish motive; (2) the client was vulnerable and reliant on Respondent as a result of the client's incarceration; and (3) Respondent's admission to the bar in 1979, experience as a public defender since 1980, and prior discipline should have given him insight into the wrongfulness of his misconduct.

The parties cite the following facts in mitigation: The parties cite the following facts in mitigation: (1) Respondent was cooperative with the Commission; and (2) Respondent has made restitution by paying $1,000 to the client's father.

The attorney has a record of prior discipline. (Mike Frisch)

 

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2011/07/the-indiana-supreme-court-approved-a-180-day-suspension-without-automatic-reinstatement-under-the-following-circumstances.html

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01538faa02c5970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Double Dip:

Comments

Post a comment