Florida Bar v. Penrose

Supreme Court of Florida

Florida Bar v. Penrose

413 So. 2d 15, 1982 Fla. LEXIS 2374

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 1982

DocketNos. 60380, 61131

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 413 So. 2d 15 (Florida Bar v. Penrose) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Florida Bar v. Penrose, 413 So. 2d 15, 1982 Fla. LEXIS 2374 (Fla. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a disciplinary proceeding brought by the Florida Bar. An evidentiary hearing before the referee resulted in a recommendation that the respondent be disbarred. The record supports the findings of the referee that the respondent (1) abandoned his law practice, leaving all files unattended and in the possession of a nonlawyer; (2) pled guilty to violating 21 U.S.C. § 844 (1977) (possession of marijuana); (3) failed to conclude a dissolution after accepting a fee to do so; (4) was involved in a conspiracy to purchase and distribute marijuana; and (5) was guilty of extortion. We approve and concur with these findings.

The composite conduct of this person is gross and clearly warrants disbarment. The legal profession cannot tolerate such conduct. Peter S. Penrose is hereby disbarred from the practice of law. Costs in the amount of $3,998.12 are assessed against him.

It is so ordered.

ADKINS, Acting Chief Justice, and BOYD, OVERTON, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a disciplinary proceeding brought by the Florida Bar. An evidentiary hearing before the referee resulted in a recommendation that the respondent be disbarred. The record supports the findings of the referee that the respondent (1) abandoned his law practice, leaving all files unattended and in the possession of a nonlawyer; (2) pled guilty to violating 21 U.S.C. § 844 (1977) (possession of marijuana); (3) failed to conclude a dissolution after accepting a fee to do so; (4) was involved in a conspiracy to purchase and distribute marijuana; and (5) was guilty of extortion. We approve and concur with these findings.

The composite conduct of this person is gross and clearly warrants disbarment. The legal profession cannot tolerate such conduct. Peter S. Penrose is hereby disbarred from the practice of law. Costs in the amount of $3,998.12 are assessed against him.

It is so ordered.

ADKINS, Acting Chief Justice, and BOYD, OVERTON, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

413 So. 2d 15, 1982 Fla. LEXIS 2374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-penrose-fla-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack