In re Harlow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Harlow

274 A.D.2d 737, 711 N.Y.S.2d 60, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8115

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

DecidedJuly 18, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 274 A.D.2d 737 (In re Harlow) 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 Harlow, 274 A.D.2d 737, 711 N.Y.S.2d 60, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8115 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1999. He resides in Connecticut, where he is also admitted to practice.

On May 9, 2000, respondent was convicted in State of Connecticut Superior Court upon his plea of guilty to the felony offense of injury or risk of injury to, or impairing morals of, children. He was sentenced to ten years in prison but the sentence was suspended and ten years of probation was imposed upon conditions including, among other things, compliance with the sex offender registration requirements, sex offender counseling and treatment, and community service.

In view of respondent’s conviction of a serious crime (see, Judiciary Law § 90 [4] [d]) we grant the motion by petitioner Committee on Professional Standards for an order suspending respondent from practice until a final disciplinary order is made in this matter (see, Judiciary Law § 90 [4] [f], [g]).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from practice, effective immediately, until a final order of suspension, censure or removal from office is made pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (g), and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that respondent, for the period of suspension, is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and he is forbidden from appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission or other public authority, and from giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rule (22 NYCRR [738]*738806.9) regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys; and it is further ordered that within twenty (20) days of the date of respondent’s discipline as an attorney in the State of Connecticut, petitioner shall submit a proposed order directing respondent to show cause why a final order of suspension, censure or removal from office should not be made pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (g).

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

—Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1999. He resides in Connecticut, where he is also admitted to practice.

On May 9, 2000, respondent was convicted in State of Connecticut Superior Court upon his plea of guilty to the felony offense of injury or risk of injury to, or impairing morals of, children. He was sentenced to ten years in prison but the sentence was suspended and ten years of probation was imposed upon conditions including, among other things, compliance with the sex offender registration requirements, sex offender counseling and treatment, and community service.

In view of respondent’s conviction of a serious crime (see, Judiciary Law § 90 [4] [d]) we grant the motion by petitioner Committee on Professional Standards for an order suspending respondent from practice until a final disciplinary order is made in this matter (see, Judiciary Law § 90 [4] [f], [g]).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from practice, effective immediately, until a final order of suspension, censure or removal from office is made pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (g), and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that respondent, for the period of suspension, is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and he is forbidden from appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission or other public authority, and from giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rule (22 NYCRR [738]*738806.9) regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys; and it is further ordered that within twenty (20) days of the date of respondent’s discipline as an attorney in the State of Connecticut, petitioner shall submit a proposed order directing respondent to show cause why a final order of suspension, censure or removal from office should not be made pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (g).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D.2d 737, 711 N.Y.S.2d 60, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-harlow-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack