In re Standard

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

In re Standard

788 A.2d 154, 2001 D.C. App. LEXIS 258, 2001 WL 1650805

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 27, 2001

DocketNo. 00-BG-835

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 788 A.2d 154 (In re Standard) 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 Standard, 788 A.2d 154, 2001 D.C. App. LEXIS 258, 2001 WL 1650805 (D.C. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that respondent Robert M. Standard be disbarred pursuant to D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001), because he was convicted in the United States District Court for the Central District of California of bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152. Neither Bar Counsel nor respondent has taken exception to the Board’s report. Since bankruptcy fraud is a crime that inherently involves moral turpitude, disbarment is mandatory and we accept the Board’s recommendation. See In re Sugarman, 677 A.2d 1049, 1050 (D.C. 1996) (per curiam). Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Robert M. Standard is disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. As respondent has not filed the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), we direct his attention to the requirements of that rule and their effect on his eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar XI, § 16(c).

So ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that respondent Robert M. Standard be disbarred pursuant to D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (2001), because he was convicted in the United States District Court for the Central District of California of bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152. Neither Bar Counsel nor respondent has taken exception to the Board’s report. Since bankruptcy fraud is a crime that inherently involves moral turpitude, disbarment is mandatory and we accept the Board’s recommendation. See In re Sugarman, 677 A.2d 1049, 1050 (D.C. 1996) (per curiam). Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Robert M. Standard is disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia. As respondent has not filed the affidavit required by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g), we direct his attention to the requirements of that rule and their effect on his eligibility for reinstatement. See D.C. Bar XI, § 16(c).

So ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

788 A.2d 154, 2001 D.C. App. LEXIS 258, 2001 WL 1650805, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-standard-dc-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack