Saturday, March 31, 2018

Arrested Development

The Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board has imposed a reciprocal nine-month suspension based on a like sanction ordered by the South Carolina Supreme Court.

From the consent to discipline in South Carolina

Lawyer was arrested on August 16, 2016 and charged with Voyeurism, in violation of S.C. Cwte 16-17-0470(B), While in a grocery store, Lawyer used his cell phone to take a photograph up the victim's skirt. 

From the South Carolina Supreme Court

At his family's insistence, he scheduled himself to be checked in to an inpatient treatment facility. However, on the day he was scheduled to report to the treatment facility, he was charged with the crime that is the basis of this disciplinary action. Respondent was highly intoxicated at the time of the incident and when he checked in to the treatment facility later that day...

Respondent notes that in nearly thirty-four years of practice as an assistant solicitor and a private practitioner, no client or any other party has lodged any type of complaint against him relating to his work.

In 1997, this Court imposed a four month suspension on respondent after he pled guilty to simple assault and battery for pulling down a woman's bathing suit while she was sunbathing at the beach in 1994...The opinion notes respondent had been involved in a similar incident in 1989, but was not prosecuted. Respondent covered his face in both incidents and fled when the women put up a struggle. He had no prior connections with either woman. In mitigation, respondent offered the testimony of a psychiatrist who testified respondent was suffering from nan adjustment disorder with mixed emotions and problems with conduct" The psychiatrist opined a "psychosexual development arrest" caused the assaults. It was also the psychiatrists opinion respondent was "developmentally arrested at the adolescent stage and his acts showed the type of sexually immature behavior normally associated with that stage. " The psychiatrist believed respondent's developmental problems occurred because of family problems when respondent was growing up, that the acts would not recur, and that respondent was responding well to treatment and counseling.

(Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink


9 moths strikes me as far too lenient for this gross misconduct, especially in light of his history. This should be a multi-year suspension.

Posted by: David Yosifon | Apr 2, 2018 9:38:58 PM

Post a comment