In re Daughtery

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Daughtery

870 A.2d 75, 2005 D.C. App. LEXIS 48, 2005 WL 612925

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 10, 2005

DocketNo. 04-BG-326

StatusPublished

This text of 870 A.2d 75 (In re Daughtery) 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 Daughtery, 870 A.2d 75, 2005 D.C. App. LEXIS 48, 2005 WL 612925 (D.C. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The respondent, Tonya L. Daughtery, converted approximately $150,000 in estate funds to her personal use while serving as the executor of an estate in Virginia. She pleaded guilty to two counts of felony embezzlement in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-111 (2004), and on May 21, 2004, was sentenced to a four-year term of incarceration on each count. Execution of the sentence was suspended as to all but one week and respondent was placed on one year of probation. Bar Counsel reported respondent’s convictions and we temporarily suspended her on April 12, 2004, pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, 10(c). We also directed the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) to institute a formal proceeding to determine the final discipline to be imposed and to decide if respondent’s crime involved “moral turpitude” within the meaning of D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001).

On July 27, 2004, the Board submitted a Report and Recommendation which concludes that respondent’s crime involved moral turpitude and recommends disbarment. Bar Counsel informs us that she takes no exception to the Report and Recommendation, and respondent has not filed an answer. Therefore, our deference to the Board is heightened. D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g)(2); In re Delaney, 697 A.2d 1212, 1214 (D.C.1997). Because we have previously determined that this crime involves moral turpitude, In re Eberhart, 678 A.2d 1023 (D.C.1996), respondent’s disbarment is mandatory under § ll-2503(a). Accordingly, we accept the Board’s recommended sanction and it is

ORDERED that Tonya L. Daughtery is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, and her name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice before this court. Moreover, since respondent has not filed the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), we direct her attention to the requirements of that rule and their effect on her eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 16(c).

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM:

The respondent, Tonya L. Daughtery, converted approximately $150,000 in estate funds to her personal use while serving as the executor of an estate in Virginia. She pleaded guilty to two counts of felony embezzlement in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-111 (2004), and on May 21, 2004, was sentenced to a four-year term of incarceration on each count. Execution of the sentence was suspended as to all but one week and respondent was placed on one year of probation. Bar Counsel reported respondent’s convictions and we temporarily suspended her on April 12, 2004, pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, 10(c). We also directed the Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) to institute a formal proceeding to determine the final discipline to be imposed and to decide if respondent’s crime involved “moral turpitude” within the meaning of D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001).

On July 27, 2004, the Board submitted a Report and Recommendation which concludes that respondent’s crime involved moral turpitude and recommends disbarment. Bar Counsel informs us that she takes no exception to the Report and Recommendation, and respondent has not filed an answer. Therefore, our deference to the Board is heightened. D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g)(2); In re Delaney, 697 A.2d 1212, 1214 (D.C.1997). Because we have previously determined that this crime involves moral turpitude, In re Eberhart, 678 A.2d 1023 (D.C.1996), respondent’s disbarment is mandatory under § ll-2503(a). Accordingly, we accept the Board’s recommended sanction and it is

ORDERED that Tonya L. Daughtery is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, and her name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice before this court. Moreover, since respondent has not filed the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), we direct her attention to the requirements of that rule and their effect on her eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 16(c).

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

870 A.2d 75, 2005 D.C. App. LEXIS 48, 2005 WL 612925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-daughtery-dc-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack