In re Boustros
This text of In re Boustros (In re Boustros) 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.
Opinion
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
No. 21-BG-424
IN RE TRICIA S. BOUTROS, RESPONDENT.
A Suspended Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals (Bar Registration No. 980803)
On Report and Recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility
(DDN 116-20)
(Decided December 2, 2021)
Before: GLICKMAN and DEAHL, Associate Judges, and FISHER, Senior Judge.
PER CURIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that
Tricia S. Boutros be disbarred from the practice of law after pleading guilty to one
count of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1) and 1344(2). This court has
previously concluded that a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1) is a crime of moral
turpitude per se.1 Respondent has not filed any exception to the Board’s Report and
Recommendation. Although Respondent failed to mail a copy of her D.C. Bar R.
1 See, e.g. In re Kelly, 816 A.2d 52 (D.C. 2003). 2
XI, § 14(g) affidavit to the court, she did file a compliant affidavit with the Board
on Professional Responsibility on September 17, 2021, and for purposes of
reinstatement we consider the affidavit filed on that date.
Under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(h)(2), “if no exceptions are filed to the Board’s
report, the [c]ourt will enter an order imposing the discipline recommended by the
Board upon the expiration of the time permitted for filing exceptions.” See also In
re Viehe, 762 A.2d 542, 543 (D.C. 2000) (“When . . . there are no exceptions to the
Board’s report and recommendation, our deferential standard of review becomes
even more deferential.”). Because no exceptions have been filed and the conviction
is a crime of moral turpitude per se for which disbarment is required by D.C. Code
§ 11-2503(a), we accept the recommendation that respondent be disbarred.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that respondent Tricia S. Boutros is hereby disbarred from the
practice of law in this jurisdiction, nunc pro tunc to September 17, 2021.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In re Boustros, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-boustros-dc-2021.