In re Effron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Effron

58 A.D.2d 510, 397 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12440

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

DecidedAugust 1, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 58 A.D.2d 510 (In re Effron) 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 Effron, 58 A.D.2d 510, 397 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12440 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the Bar by this court on October 18, 1972. He was convicted, on March 25, 1975, upon his plea of guilty, of unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly combining, confederating and agreeing with others to violate sections 812, 841 (subd [a], par [1]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [B]) and 843 (subd [b]) of title 21 of the United States Code and that he unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly distributed and possessed with intent to distribute certain narcotic drug controlled substances in violation of sections 812, 841 (subd [a], par (1]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [A]) and 846 of title 21 of the United States Code.

The facts in the record establish that respondent’s Federal conviction amounted to a felony under the New York statutes. His name must therefore be struck from the roll of attorneys (see Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 NY2d [511]*511144; see, also, Matter of Cristenfeld, 58 AD2d 505).

However, even if the offenses of which respondent stands convicted were misdemeanors under New York law, we would nevertheless have confirmed the report and disbarred him under the facts.

Accordingly, respondent should be, and he hereby is, disbarred from further practice of law and his name is ordered removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective forthwith.

Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Damiani and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the Bar by this court on October 18, 1972. He was convicted, on March 25, 1975, upon his plea of guilty, of unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly combining, confederating and agreeing with others to violate sections 812, 841 (subd [a], par [1]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [B]) and 843 (subd [b]) of title 21 of the United States Code and that he unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly distributed and possessed with intent to distribute certain narcotic drug controlled substances in violation of sections 812, 841 (subd [a], par (1]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [A]) and 846 of title 21 of the United States Code.

The facts in the record establish that respondent’s Federal conviction amounted to a felony under the New York statutes. His name must therefore be struck from the roll of attorneys (see Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 NY2d [511]*511144; see, also, Matter of Cristenfeld, 58 AD2d 505).

However, even if the offenses of which respondent stands convicted were misdemeanors under New York law, we would nevertheless have confirmed the report and disbarred him under the facts.

Accordingly, respondent should be, and he hereby is, disbarred from further practice of law and his name is ordered removed from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective forthwith.

Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Damiani and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.2d 510, 397 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-effron-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack