See, e.g., People v. Farry, 909 P.2d 1096, 1097–98 (Colo.1996) (publicly censuring a lawyer who negligently failed to advise a client of the lawyer's possible conflicts of interest, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and disregarded a judicial ruling, where mitigating factors outweighed aggravators and no actual harm was occasioned); People v. Fritze, 926 P.2d 574, 575–76 (Colo.1996) (publicly censuring a lawyer whose “neglect and inexperience” caused him to negligently violate conflict of interest rules); People v. Gebauer, 821 P.2d 782, 784–85 (Colo.1991) (publicly censuring a lawyer who negligently breached conflict of interest rules).
On the other hand, a public censure is the presumed sanction if the lawyer is at most "negligent in determining whether the representation of a client may be materially affected by the lawyer's own interests, or whether the representation will adversely affect another client, and causes injury or potential injury to a client." ABA Standards, supra, at 4.33; see also People v. Fritze, 926 P.2d 574, 576 (Colo. 1996) (representing conflicting interests through negligence warrants public censure). We need not reach the issue of whether the hearing board's findings of actual injury are correct for the purpose of analyzing the level of discipline, however.
The ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (1991 Supp. 1992) (ABA Standards) provides that, in the absence of aggravating or mitigating factors, public censure is warranted if the lawyer is "negligent in determining whether the representation of a client may be materially affected by the lawyer's own interests, or whether the representation will adversely affect another client, and causes injury or potential injury to a client." Id. at 4.33; see People v. Fritze, 926 P.2d 574, 576 (Colo. 1996) (lawyer publicly censured for failing to recognize that a conflict existed in representing homeowners, general contractor, and bank in an action to foreclose subcontractor's mechanics' lien); People v. Farry, 909 P.2d 1096, 1098 (Colo. 1996) (lawyer publicly censured when conflicting representations were entered into negligently rather than intentionally); People v. Vsetecka, 893 P.2d 1309, 1311 (Colo. 1995) (lawyer publicly censured for representing two clients after it had become clear that a conflict existed).