You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

In re McCoole

Citations: 791 A.2d 910; 2002 D.C. App. LEXIS 39; 2002 WL 242868Docket: No. 00-BG-1634

Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals; February 20, 2002; District Of Columbia; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves a recommendation for the disbarment of a legal practitioner from the District of Columbia Bar following his guilty plea to three felony counts of grand larceny in the second degree in New York. Upon notification of these convictions, the court temporarily suspended him on January 5, 2001, under specific provisions of the D.C. Bar Rules. The felonies were classified as involving moral turpitude, thereby mandating disbarment according to D.C. Code § 11-2503(a). The Board on Professional Responsibility further noted the practitioner's failure to file the required affidavit, thus delaying the commencement of the period for potential readmission until compliance. The Board also advised dismissing a reciprocal discipline case related to his previous disbarment in New Jersey as moot. The practitioner had previously been disbarred by the New York Supreme Court in 1997 and the New Jersey Supreme Court in 2000. The court's decision culminated in the immediate disbarment of the practitioner from the D.C. Bar, reinforcing the serious consequence of felony convictions involving moral turpitude on an attorney's professional standing.

Legal Issues Addressed

Disbarment Due to Felony Convictions

Application: The respondent is disbarred from practicing law due to felony convictions involving moral turpitude.

Reasoning: The criminal convictions are deemed to involve moral turpitude, necessitating disbarment under D.C. Code § 11-2503(a).

Immediate Disbarment and Affidavit Requirement

Application: Disbarment is effective immediately, and the period for readmission starts only after filing the required affidavit.

Reasoning: Consequently, he is disbarred effective immediately, and the timeline for potential readmission will only commence upon filing the necessary affidavit.

Reciprocal Discipline Proceedings

Application: The reciprocal discipline proceeding related to a disbarment in another jurisdiction is dismissed as moot.

Reasoning: Additionally, the Board recommends dismissal of the reciprocal discipline proceeding related to his disbarment in New Jersey as moot.

Suspension Following Criminal Convictions

Application: The respondent was suspended following notification of his felony convictions under specific rules of the D.C. Bar.

Reasoning: Following notification of his convictions, the court suspended him from legal practice on January 5, 2001, in accordance with D.C. Bar R. XI. 10(c) and Rule XI. 11(d).