In re Intriago

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Intriago

171 A.3d 205, 231 N.J. 20

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 20, 2017·No. 079214·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 13-263, that SASHA C. INTRIAGO of ELIZABETH, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2007, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 8.4(b)(committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that SASHA C. INTRIAGO is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

[21] ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

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

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 13-263, that SASHA C. INTRIAGO of ELIZABETH, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2007, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 8.4(b)(committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that SASHA C. INTRIAGO is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

[21] ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

In re Intriago, 171 A.3d 205, 231 N.J. 20 (N.J. 2017).

Pincite

171 A.3d 205 (In re Intriago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.