From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re a Member of State Bar of Az., MacPherson

Supreme Court of Arizona
Jun 26, 2008
Supreme Court No. SB-08-0079-D (Ariz. Jun. 26, 2008)

Opinion

Supreme Court No. SB-08-0079-D

June 26, 2008.

Disciplinary Commission No. 06-1378.


JUDGMENT AND ORDER

This matter having come before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision, there having been no discretionary review and sua sponte review having been declined by the Court,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that CARL D. MACPHERSON, a member of the State Bar of Arizona, is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty days, effective thirty days from the date of this order, for conduct in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the Disciplinary Commission Report.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CARL D. MACPHERSON shall be placed on probation for a period of one year upon reinstatement and effective upon the signing of the probation contract. Bar Counsel shall notify the Disciplinary Clerk of the date on which the probation begins. The terms of probation are as follows:

1. Respondent shall contact the Director of LOMAP who shall develop a probation contract with any terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the LOMAP director or designee. Respondent agrees to comply with any recommended terms of probation. At minimum, the LOMAP contract will require Respondent to attend an ethics class on integrity, honesty and the absolute necessity of candor toward the tribunal.

2. In the event that Respondent fails to comply with any of the foregoing conditions, and the State Bar receives information, bar counsel shall file with the imposing entity a Notice of Non-Compliance, pursuant to Rule 60(a)(5), Ariz.R.Sup.Ct. The Hearing Officer shall conduct a hearing within 30-days after receipt of said notice, to determine whether the terms of probation have been violated and if an additional sanction should be imposed. In the event there is an allegation that any of these terms have been violated, the burden of proof shall be on the State Bar of Arizona to prove non-compliance by clear and convincing evidence.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CARL D. MACPHERSON shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 72, Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, including, but not limited to, Rule 72(a), which requires that Respondent notify all of his clients, within ten (10) days from the date hereof, of his inability to represent them and that he should promptly inform this Court of his compliance with this Order as provided in Rule 72(e).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that CARL D. MACPHERSON shall comply with all rule provisions regarding reinstatement proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 60(b), the State Bar of Arizona is granted judgment against CARL D. MACPHERSON for costs and expenses of these proceedings in the amount of $1352.48, together with interest at the legal rate from the date of this judgment.

DATED this _______ day of ___________, 2008.

TO:

Carl D. Macpherson, Respondent (Certified Mail, Return Receipt and Regular Mail)

Tom Slutes, Respondent's Counsel

David L. Sandweiss, Bar Counsel

Honorable H. Jeffrey Coker, Hearing Officer

Leticia V. D'Amore, Disciplinary Clerk (Cert. Copy)

Sandra Montoya, Lawyer Regulation Records Manager, State Bar of Arizona (Cert. Copy)

Cathy Catterson, Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Cert. Copy)

Richard Weare, Clerk, United States District Court, District of Arizona (Cert. Copy)

West Publishing Company (Jode Ottman)

Lexis/Nexis


Summaries of

In re a Member of State Bar of Az., MacPherson

Supreme Court of Arizona
Jun 26, 2008
Supreme Court No. SB-08-0079-D (Ariz. Jun. 26, 2008)
Case details for

In re a Member of State Bar of Az., MacPherson

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF A MEMBER OF THE STATE BAR OF ARIZONA, CARL D. MACPHERSON…

Court:Supreme Court of Arizona

Date published: Jun 26, 2008

Citations

Supreme Court No. SB-08-0079-D (Ariz. Jun. 26, 2008)