In re Castelbuono

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Castelbuono

136 A.D.2d 120, 526 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3067

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 22, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 136 A.D.2d 120 (In re Castelbuono) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Castelbuono, 136 A.D.2d 120, 526 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3067 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in the First Department on December 22, 1969. By judgment rendered December 8, 1987, respondent was convicted, upon his plea of guilty in the Supreme Court, New York County, of burglary in the second degree, a class C felony. (Penal Law § 140.25 [1] [a].)

[121]*121As a result of such conviction respondent has been automatically disbarred pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a). (Matter of Wall, 75 AD2d 196.) We, accordingly, need not consider the legal effect under Judiciary Law §90 (4) (b) of four Federal felonies alleging conspiracy to import heroin and the laundering of money profits as to which respondent pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and for which he was sentenced on December 4, 1987.

The petition submitted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeking to strike respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys should accordingly be granted.

Sandler, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Rosenberger and Smith, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York effective the date hereof.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in the First Department on December 22, 1969. By judgment rendered December 8, 1987, respondent was convicted, upon his plea of guilty in the Supreme Court, New York County, of burglary in the second degree, a class C felony. (Penal Law § 140.25 [1] [a].)

[121]*121As a result of such conviction respondent has been automatically disbarred pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (a). (Matter of Wall, 75 AD2d 196.) We, accordingly, need not consider the legal effect under Judiciary Law §90 (4) (b) of four Federal felonies alleging conspiracy to import heroin and the laundering of money profits as to which respondent pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and for which he was sentenced on December 4, 1987.

The petition submitted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeking to strike respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys should accordingly be granted.

Sandler, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Rosenberger and Smith, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York effective the date hereof.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 A.D.2d 120, 526 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3067, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-castelbuono-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack