Legal Opinion

In re Cary Clennon

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 5, 2018No. 18-BG-66Published

1Per curiam

In this case, the Board on Professional Responsibility has adopted the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee's uncontested findings *122 that respondent Cary Clennon failed to represent a criminal defendant after being appointed to represent him under the Criminal Justice Act, and made factual misrepresentations to both his client and the Court in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3 (a), 1.3 (c), 1.4 (a), 1.4 (b), 3.3 (a)(1), 8.4 (c), and 8.4 (d). Before the Hearing Committee, Mr. Clennon stipulated to facts supporting the violations and expressed remorse and confidence that he would not repeat…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In Re VieheDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. Matter of BurtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. In re AskewDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. In re FrancisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API