Opinion
AG 38-2022
08-15-2023
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. CELESTINE TATUNG
ORDER
Shirley M. Watts Senior Justice.
Upon consideration of the Joint Petition for Reprimand filed by the Petitioner, the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland, and Respondent, Celestine Tatung, on August 9, 2023, in the above-captioned case, in which the parties advise that the Respondent agrees that his conduct, as described in the Joint Petition, violated Rule 1.15 (safekeeping property) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and Federal Immigration Rules of Professional Conduct of Practitioners, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.102(n) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), (q)(1) and (2) (diligence), and (r)(1)-(3) (communication) and that the Respondent consents to a reprimand, it is this 15th day of August 2023
ORDERED, by the Supreme Court of Maryland, that the Respondent, Celestine Tatung, is REPRIMANDED for violating Rule 1.15 (safekeeping property) of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and Federal Immigration Rules of Professional Conduct of Practitioners, 8 C.F.R. §1003.102(n) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), (q)(1) and (2) (diligence), and (r)(1)-(3) (communication).