In Re Allison

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In Re Allison

990 A.2d 467, 2010 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2010 WL 723671

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 4, 2010

Docket09-BG-161

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 990 A.2d 467 (In Re Allison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Allison, 990 A.2d 467, 2010 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2010 WL 723671 (D.C. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

*468 PER CURIAM:

In the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, respondent Richard W. Allison Jr. pled guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. 1 Mr. Allison had participated in a scheme to defraud homeowners and mortgage lenders. After Bar Counsel informed this court of the guilty plea, we temporarily suspended Mr. Allison pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 10(c) and directed the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) to institute a formal proceeding to determine the nature of the offense and whether it involved moral turpitude within the meaning of D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001).

In its Report and Recommendation, the Board concluded that Mr. Allison’s offense constituted moral turpitude per se and recommends disbarment. Neither Bar Counsel nor Mr. Allison takes exception the Board’s Report and Recommendation. We therefore accept the Board’s findings and adopt its recommendation. See D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 9(h).

“It is well settled that mail fraud is a crime of moral turpitude per se.” In re Leffler, 940 A.2d 105, 106 (D.C.2007); see In re Schainker, 871 A.2d 1206 (D.C.2005); In re Firestone, 824 A.2d 47 (D.C.2003); In re Evans, 793 A.2d 468 (D.C.2002). Under D.C.Code § 11-2503(a) (2001), disbarment is mandatory for a member convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude where, as here, a certified copy of the respondent’s conviction is presented to this court. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Richard W. Allison Jr. is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, and his name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice before this court. Mr. Allison’s disbarment shall run, for the purposes of reinstatement, from the date he files an affidavit that complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g). See In re Slosberg, 650 A.2d 1329, 1331 (D.C.1994).

So ordered.

1

. Violations of the 2006 edition of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343 and 1349.

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

*468 PER CURIAM:

In the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, respondent Richard W. Allison Jr. pled guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. 1 Mr. Allison had participated in a scheme to defraud homeowners and mortgage lenders. After Bar Counsel informed this court of the guilty plea, we temporarily suspended Mr. Allison pursuant to D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 10(c) and directed the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) to institute a formal proceeding to determine the nature of the offense and whether it involved moral turpitude within the meaning of D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001).

In its Report and Recommendation, the Board concluded that Mr. Allison’s offense constituted moral turpitude per se and recommends disbarment. Neither Bar Counsel nor Mr. Allison takes exception the Board’s Report and Recommendation. We therefore accept the Board’s findings and adopt its recommendation. See D.C. Bar Rule XI, § 9(h).

“It is well settled that mail fraud is a crime of moral turpitude per se.” In re Leffler, 940 A.2d 105, 106 (D.C.2007); see In re Schainker, 871 A.2d 1206 (D.C.2005); In re Firestone, 824 A.2d 47 (D.C.2003); In re Evans, 793 A.2d 468 (D.C.2002). Under D.C.Code § 11-2503(a) (2001), disbarment is mandatory for a member convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude where, as here, a certified copy of the respondent’s conviction is presented to this court. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Richard W. Allison Jr. is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, and his name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice before this court. Mr. Allison’s disbarment shall run, for the purposes of reinstatement, from the date he files an affidavit that complies with the requirements of D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g). See In re Slosberg, 650 A.2d 1329, 1331 (D.C.1994).

So ordered.

1

. Violations of the 2006 edition of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343 and 1349.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

990 A.2d 467, 2010 D.C. App. LEXIS 86, 2010 WL 723671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-allison-dc-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack