From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Lanphier on Discipline

Supreme Court of California
Feb 23, 2022
No. S270354 (Cal. Feb. 23, 2022)

Opinion

S270354

02-23-2022

LANPHIER ON DISCIPLINE


Petition for review denied; recommended discipline imposed

The request for judicial notice is granted. The motion to strike is denied.

The petition for review is denied.

The court orders that STEELE LANPHIER (Respondent), State Bar Number 146163, is suspended from the practice of law in California for two years, execution of that period of suspension is stayed, and Respondent is placed on probation for two years subject to the following conditions:

1. Respondent is suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of the first six months of probation, and Respondent will remain suspended until the following requirement is satisfied:

Respondent makes restitution to Herbert Gomez, or such other recipient as may be designated by the Office of Probation or the State Bar Court, in the amount of $5, 600 plus 10 percent interest per year from September 2, 2016 (or reimburses the Client Security Fund, to the extent of any payment from the Fund to such payee, in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 6140.5) and furnishes satisfactory proof to the State Bar’s Office of Probation in Los Angeles. Reimbursement to the Fund is enforceable as a money judgment and may be collected by the State Bar through any means permitted by law.

2. Respondent must also comply with the other conditions of probation recommended by the Review Department of the State Bar Court in its Opinion filed on June 25, 2021.

3. At the expiration of the period of probation, if Respondent has complied with all conditions of probation, the period of stayed suspension will be satisfied, and that suspension will be terminated.

Respondent must provide to the State Bar’s Office of Probation proof of taking and passing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination as recommended by the Review Department in its Opinion filed on June 25, 2021. Failure to do so may result in suspension. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.10(b).)

Respondent must also comply with the California Rules of Court, rule 9.20, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) of that rule within 30 and 40 calendar days, respectively, after the effective date of this order. Failure to do so may result in disbarment or suspension. Respondent must also maintain the records of compliance as required by the conditions of probation.

Costs are awarded to the State Bar in accordance with Business and Professions Code section 6086.10 and are enforceable both as provided in Business and Professions Code section 6140.7 and as a money judgment, and may be collected by the State Bar through any means permitted by law.

Fourth Appellate District, Div. 2 TRANSFER ORDERS

The following matters, now pending in the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, are transferred from Division Two to Division One:

1.

E077284

Hani Sayegh et al. v. Citizens Business Bank

2.

E077440

People v. Jose Ochoa

3.

E077755

People v. Jose Hernandez

4.

E077820

People v. Richard Morgan

5.

E077841

People v. Joe Ortega

6.

E077843

People v. Latravius Gobert

7.

E077846

People v. Michael Callahan

8.

E077891

People v. Javier Bonilla


Summaries of

In re Lanphier on Discipline

Supreme Court of California
Feb 23, 2022
No. S270354 (Cal. Feb. 23, 2022)
Case details for

In re Lanphier on Discipline

Case Details

Full title:LANPHIER ON DISCIPLINE

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Feb 23, 2022

Citations

No. S270354 (Cal. Feb. 23, 2022)