From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Joseph

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 19, 2008
52 A.D.3d 1109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

June 19, 2008.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1990. He maintained an office for the practice of law in Connecticut.

Mark S. Ochs, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Geoffrey E. Major of counsel), for petitioner.

David P. Friedman, Bridgeport, Connecticut, for respondent.

Before: Peters, J.P., Carpinello, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ.


Respondent pleaded guilty in April 2007 in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut to a single count of tax evasion in violation of 26 USC § 7201. The information and plea agreement show a pattern of tax evasion encompassing multiple years and substantial sums of money. By decision dated October 11, 2007, this Court suspended respondent from practice based on his conviction of a serious crime pending entry of a final order after respondent's sentence ( see Judiciary Law § 90 [f]; Matter of Richichi, 44 AD3d 1085). On December 19, 2007, respondent was sentenced to a 16-month term of imprisonment, a $15,000 fine, and two years of supervised release.

Petitioner now moves for an order imposing final discipline pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (g). In reply, respondent requests discipline consonant with a period of suspension imposed in Connecticut after a disciplinary proceeding in that state.

Under the circumstances presented, and considering the serious criminal conduct committed by respondent, we conclude that he should be disbarred in this state.

Ordered that petitioner's motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further ordered that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and respondent is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court's rules regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys ( see 22 NYCRR 806.9).


Summaries of

In re Joseph

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 19, 2008
52 A.D.3d 1109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

In re Joseph

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOSEPH RICHICHI, a Suspended Attorney, Respondent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jun 19, 2008

Citations

52 A.D.3d 1109 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5628
858 N.Y.S.2d 921

Citing Cases

Comm. on Prof'l Standards v. Cooper (In re Cooper)

Respondent does not contest the propriety of the motion.Under the circumstances presented, and considering…

In the Matter of Christopher M. Uhl

Respondent has not replied to the motion. Under the circumstances presented, which include “a pattern of tax…