Legal Opinion
In Re Caplan
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 27, 1997No. 96-BG-541PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
Following his conviction and sentence in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, for grand theft (§ 487 of the California Penal Code) and practice of law without a license (§ 6126(b) of the California Business and Professions Code), respondent was disbarred from the practice of law by the Supreme Court of the State of California. The Board on Professional Responsibility likewise recommends disbarment, see D.C.Code § 11-2503(a) (1995), on the ground that the theft statute under which respondent was convicted involves moral turpitude per se. See In re Colson, 412…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of ColsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. ArriolaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Matter of BoydDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- In Re SluysDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Matter of SchwartzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re SpiridonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
- In Re PattersonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- In Re BendetDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- In re WheelerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- In Re KrounerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007