THE FLORIDA BAR, PETITIONER,
v.
FRANK RAGANO, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Disciplinary action is withheld pending resolution of the appeal of a felony conviction.
Respondent, an attorney, was convicted of income tax evasion. The Florida Bar petitioned for his suspension. Respondent appealed his conviction and re…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Suspension From Practice cases and more on FLexlaw
Respondent, Frank Ragano, a member of The Florida Bar, has been convicted in United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, of a felony, to-wit: income tax evasion in violation of § 7201 and § 7206(1), Title 26, United States Code. The Florida Bar has petitioned for his suspension from practice under Article 11.07(3), Integration Rules of The Florida Bar, 32 F.S.A. In response, Ragano has petitioned for a modification of any suspension pending determination of an appeal of his conviction to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
In our judgment, the interests of the public, The Florida Bar, and the respondent would best be served by withholding disciplinary action until resolution of the appeal. The following factors have contributed to this judgment: We have been informed that the conviction arose out of a technical dispute whether a certain stock transaction should have been reported by respondent as a capital gain or as ordinary income; the matter did not involve any client; it appears, although we make no judgment, that the asserted grounds for appeal are not without plausible merit; respondent has not been the subject of previous disciplinary action; numerous judicial officers from the 13th Judicial Circuit, in response to his request, have written favorably regarding respondent’s ethics and his legal ability.
We fully expect that respondent will prosecute his appeal with all possible vigor; to this end we hereby require that he inform The Florida Bar from time to time on the progress of his action. Should it appear to The Florida Bar that respondent is becoming dilatory in the role of appellant, we expect to be informed.
*4The petition submitted by The Florida Bar is denied pending disposition of respondent’s appeal, or until such time as the Court deems further action appropriate.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Prior, 330 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1976)…ble pre-1969 predecessor, Rule 11.08(3), appears at 32 F.S.A. 544 (1967). . 469 F. 2d 1352 (7th Cir. 1972). . 191 So. 2d 49 (Fla.1966). . 301 So. 2d 768 (Fla.1974). . The first suspension proceeding concerned Ragano’s initial conviction in 1972. 270 So. 2d 3 (Ma.1972). The second concerned a suspension proceeding for a 1974 felony conviction. Case No. 45,680 (Fla., filed November 27, 1974), vacated and superseded (Fla., filed November 4, 1975). Accordingly, the Court’s 1974 opinion now is not precedent.…1 / 2
-
THE Florida BAR v. Oakley G. Smith, Jr., 301 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1974)…n any felony criminal case all doubts are resolved against modification of suspension pending appeal, and no meaningful discretion abides in this Court under the rule to defer suspension pending appeal. But see, The Florida Bar v. Ragano (Fla.1972), 270 So. 2d 3. Through his attorney, William A. Meadows, Jr., the Respondent responds to the Bar’s petition and on Respondent’s behalf petitions this Court to modify or terminate suspension pending appeal, alleging: “Oakley G. Smith, Jr., by and through his und…1 / 2