Legal Opinion
In Re Drew
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 8, 1997No. 96-BG-1683PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Per curiam
Respondent was charged with violating thirteen ethical rules while representing two defendants in separate criminal cases. In the first ease, respondent failed to note an appeal when he knew that his client wished to appeal his conviction. In the second case, respondent failed to both note an appeal and file a motion to modify his client’s sentence.
The hearing committee found by clear and convincing evidence that respondent had violated two of the rules charged. Specifically, the committee concluded that respondent violated, in the first case, D.C. Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5(b)…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- In Re GoldsboroughDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- In Re MicheelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- In Re HopkinsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re RayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- In Re CaterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re HallmarkDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- In Re BernsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- In Re EvansDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- In Re UkwuDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.