Board of Professional Responsibility v. Bustos

2010 WY 13, 224 P.3d 873, 2010 Wyo. LEXIS 14, 2010 WL 457315
CourtWyoming Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 10, 2010
DocketD-10-0001
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2010 WY 13 (Board of Professional Responsibility v. Bustos) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Board of Professional Responsibility v. Bustos, 2010 WY 13, 224 P.3d 873, 2010 Wyo. LEXIS 14, 2010 WL 457315 (Wyo. 2010).

Opinion

ORDER OF PUBLIC CENSURE

[T1] This matter came before the Court upon a "Report and Recommendation for Public Censure," filed herein January 26, 2010, by the Board of Professional Responsibility for the Wyoming State Bar, pursuant to Section 16 of the Disciplinary Code for the Wyoming State Bar (stipulated discipline). The Court, after a careful review of the *874 Board of Professional Responsibility's Report and Recommendation, the respondent's "See-tion 16 Affidavit," and the file, finds that the Report and Recommendation should be approved, confirmed and adopted by the Court, and that Respondent Jose Delaluz Bustos should be publicly censured in the manner set forth in the Report and Recommendation. It is, therefore,

[T2] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that the Board of Professional Responsibility's Report and Recommendation for Public Censure, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (without attachments), shall be, and the same hereby is, approved, confirmed, and adopted by this Court; and it is further

[13] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that Mr. Bustos shall receive a public censure for his conduct, and he shall be publicly censured in a manner consistent with the recommended censure contained in the Report and Recommendation for Public Censure; and it is further

[T4] ORDERED that, pursuant to Seetion 26 of the Disciplinary Code for the Wyoming State Bar, Mr. Bustos shall reimburse the Wyoming State Bar the amount of $25.00, representing some of the costs incurred in handling this matter, as well as pay the administrative fee of $500.00. Mr. Bus-tos shall pay the total amount of $525.00 to the Clerk of the Board of Professional Responsibility on or before March 30, 2010; and it is further

[15] ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall docket this Order of Public Censure, along with the incorporated Report and Recommendation for Public Censure, as a matter coming regularly before this Court as a public record; and it is further

[T6] ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Disciplinary Code for the Wyoming State Bar, this Order of Public Censure, along with the incorporated Report and Recommendation for Public Censure, shall be published in the Wyoming Reporter and the Pacific Reporter; and it is further

[17] ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court cause a copy of the Order of Public Censure to be served upon Respondent Jose Delaluz Bustos; and it is further

[T8] ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court transmit a copy of this Order of Public Censure to members of the Board of Professional Responsibility, and to the clerks of the appropriate courts of the State of Wyoming.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Barton R. Voigt BARTON R. VOIGT Chief Justice

ATTACHMENT

D-10-0001

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

WYOMING STATE BAR

STATE OF WYOMING

In the matter of

JOSE DELALUZ BUSTOS,

WSB Attorney No. 6-8581

Respondent.

Docket No. 2009-148.

IN THE SUPREME COURT

FILED JAN. 26, 2010

JUDY PACHECO, CLERK

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLIC CENSURE

The Board of Professional Responsibility makes the following report and recommendation, with its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation to the Supreme Court of Wyoming:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Respondent, Jose Delaluz Bustos, is currently an active member of the Wyoming State Bar and has been since 2002. He resides in Cheyenne, Wyoming.
2. In early 2009, Respondent represented Paulino Sanchez-Chaparro in re *875 gard to an appeal in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
On or about 21 August 2009, Respondent received an Order to show case regarding his failure to file an appellate brief in a timely fashion. A true and correct copy of that Order is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Respondent agrees that the facts stated in that Order are accurate.
Respondent did nothing in response to that Order.
On or about 13 November 2009, Respondent received an Order from the 10th Cireuit Court of Appeals which indefinitely suspended him from the practice of law before that court. A true and correct copy of that Order is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
On 30 December 2009, Respondent wrote a letter to Bar Counsel which attempted to explain, but not exeuse, his conduct in the Chaparro matter. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit C.
Respondent's failure to file the necessary briefs on behalf of his client was a violation of Rule 1.1 of the Wyoming Rules of Professional Conduct.
Respondent's failure to respond to the 21 August 2009 Order from the 10th Cireuit was a violation of Rule 3.4(c) of the Wyoming Rules of Professional Conduct.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Standard 4.48 of the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions discusses the acts which result in a public censure for violation of Rule 1.1: "Reprimand [or public censure] is generally appropriate when a lawyer is negligent and does not act with reasonable diligence in representing a client, and causes injury or potential injury to a client."
Standard 6.28 of the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions discusses the acts which result in a public censure for violation of Rule 8.4(c):
"Reprimand [or public censure] is generally appropriate when a lawyer is negligent lawyer negligently fails to comply with a court order or rule, and causes injury or potential injury to a client or other party, or causes interference or potential interference with a legal proceeding."
ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 9.1 provides for consideration of aggravating and mitigating cireumstances in deciding on an appropriate sanction. Section 9.21 defines aggravating circumstances as "any consideration, or factors that may justify an increase in the degree of discipline to he imposed." Section 9.31 defines mitigating cireumstances as "any considerations, or factors that may justify a reduction in the degree of discipline to be imposed."
a. Applicable aggravating factors in this case are:
i. Section experience in the practice of law.
b. Applicable mitigating factors are:
i. Section 9.82(a)-absence of a pri- or disciplinary record;
11. Section 9.82(c)-personal or emotional problems;
iii. Section 9.82(e)-full and free disclosure to disciplinary board or cooperative attitude toward proceedings; and
iv. Section 9.82(k)--imposition of other penalties or sanctions.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Trestyn
646 F.3d 732 (Tenth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2010 WY 13, 224 P.3d 873, 2010 Wyo. LEXIS 14, 2010 WL 457315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-professional-responsibility-v-bustos-wyo-2010.