THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HERBERT M. BROWN, 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.
The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Herbert M. Brown for accepting unauthorized compensation, a felony conviction. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's recommendation of a two-year suspension followed by proof of rehabilitation.
The Court approved suspension of Brown's license for two years from the date of completion of his confinement sentence, with continued suspension thereafter until he proves his rehabilitation as required by Rule 11.10(3).
[1] A plea of nolo contendere to a felony charge constitutes a violation of disciplinary rules prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation,…
[2] A felony conviction, including one based on a nolo contendere plea, can serve as the basis for attorney disciplinary proceedings.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“by reason of the foregoing, Respondent has violated Rule 11.02(2), (3)(a), (b) of the Integration Rule and Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3), (4); 8-101(A)(2), (3); and 9-101(B), (C) of the Code of Professional Responsibility”
establishes the specific disciplinary rules violated by the attorney's unauthorized compensation and criminal conduct
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrown, a Florida Bar member, was charged on April 9, 1975, with accepting unauthorized compensation, a felony. He entered a plea of nolo contendere on…
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 Violation Of Code Of Professional Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding by The Florida Bar against Herbert M. Brown, a member of The Florida Bar is presently before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and Report of Referee. Pursuant to Rule 11.-06(9)(b) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, the referee’s report and record were duly filed with this Court. No petition for review pursuant to Rule 11.09(1), Integration Rule, has been filed.
The Complaint of the Bar contained the following allegations:
1. The Respondent, Herbert M. Brown is, and at all times hereinafter mentioned was, a member of The Florida Bar, subject to the jurisdiction and disciplinary rules of the Supreme Court of Florida.
2. This Complaint is filed by The Florida Bar, by direction of its Board of Governors, and all conditions prerequisite to the filing of said Complaint, required by the Integration Rule, have been fulfilled.
3. On April 9, 1975, Respondent was charged by information filed in the Circuit Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida, in and for Pinellas County, with the crime of accepting unauthorized compensation.
4. Said crime is a felony under the laws of the State of Florida.
5. On or about September 8, 1975, Respondent entered a plea of nolo conten-dere to the above charge.
6. On December 29, 1975, Respondent was adjudicated guilty as charged and sentenced to the custody of the Division of Corrections.
The Referee found that by reason of the foregoing, Respondent has violated Rule 11.02(2), (3)(a), (b) of the Integration Rule and Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3), (4); 8— 101(A)(2), (3); and 9-101(B), (C) of the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommends the following discipline: suspension for a period of two (2) years and thereafter until he shall prove his rehabilitation as provided in Rule 11.10(3) and that said two (2) years suspension should commence from the date of completion of service of his confinement sentence.
Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee.
Costs in the amount of $111.00 are hereby taxed against the Respondent.
It is so ordered.
ENGLAND, C. J., and OVERTON, SUNDBERG, ALDERMAN and MCDONALD, JJ., concur. [*MCCLVII] ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., would approve the findings and recommendations of the referee but without the necessity of proof of rehabilitation.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Lancaster, 448 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1984)…980). As for Lancaster’s argument that the evidence was insufficient, this Court has previously held that a nolo contendere [*1022] plea along with an adjudication of guilt is sufficient to sustain disciplinary action. See The Florida Bar v. Brown, 377 So. 2d 1176 (Fla.1979); The Florida Bar v. Duffee, 343 So. 2d 829 (Fla.1977); The Florida Bar v. Silver, 313 So. 2d 688 (FIa.197,5); State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Evans, 94 So. 2d 730 (Fla.1957). In Evans this Court stated that in a disbarment proceeding based…
-
THE Fla. BAR. Re Herbert M. Brown, 398 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 1981)…ar examination. It is so ordered. [*810] SUNDBERG, C. J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, and McDONALD JJ., concur. BOYD, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part with an opinion with which ADKINS and ENGLAND, JJ., concur. . The Florida Bar v. Brown, 377 So. 2d 1176 (Fla.1979). . Although the final decision suspending the petitioner was rendered in December, 1979, petitioner has been suspended since January, 1976.…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Capodilupo, 482 So. 2d 1367 (Fla. 1986)…It is noted that the Supreme Court of Florida held that a nolo contendré plea along with an adjudication of guilt is sufficient to sustain disciplinary action. The Florida Bar v. Lancaster, 448 So. 2d 1019, 1022 (Fla.1984); The Florida Bar v. Brown, 377 So. 2d 1176 (Fla.1979). Also, an attorney’s pleading nolo contendré to a misdemeanor is relevant to his fitness to practice law. The Florida Bar v. Lancaster, 448 So. 2d 1019, 1021. See The Florida Bar v. Agar, 394 So. 2d 405 (Fla.1980). Record, Page 55, lines…