Legal Opinion

People v. Dieters

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided February 18, 1992No. 91SA211PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

In this attorney discipline proceeding, a hearing panel of the Supreme Court Grievance Committee recommended that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for thirty days for submitting an altered stipulation in a judicial proceeding that the respondent knew did not express the agreement of the parties. We issued an order to show cause why more severe discipline should not be imposed. We have considered the responses of the respondent and the assistant disciplinary counsel and now conclude that a suspension for ninety days is warranted.

I

The respondent was admitted to the bar of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. BennettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  2. People v. CrimaldiSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  3. People v. DistelSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  4. People v. GenchiSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  5. People v. WhitakerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. People v. WechslerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
  2. People v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  3. People v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  4. People v. KearnsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  5. People v. McDowellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API