| Description: |
Paul H. King (WSBA No. 7370, admitted 1977), formerly of Seattle, was disbarred, effective January 13, 2011, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following an appeal. This discipline is based on conduct involving the commission of a crime. For more information, see In re King, __Wn.2d__, __P.3d__ (2011). Note: While this matter was on appeal, the Supreme Court ordered Mr. King's disbarment in an unrelated case decided in June 2010 (In re King, 168 Wn.2d 888, 232 P.3d 1095 (2010)). Disbarment was imposed for, among other things, practicing law while suspended. This subsequent, second disbarment does not affect that previous order.
In July 2008, Mr. King was charged in United States District Court with five counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1341, based on allegations that he helped an individual fraudulently obtain benefits from the Washington State Employment Security Department. On November 24, 2008, Mr. King signed a plea agreement, admitting he was guilty of the charged offense and admitting to the facts necessary to establish the elements of mail fraud. Before entering the guilty plea, Mr. King testified under oath that his plea was made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. Mr. King was convicted of mail fraud and sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay $44,858 in restitution to the Washington State Employment Security Department.
Mr. King previously had been suspended three times from the practice of law for conduct involving dishonesty. Mr. King did not dispute the hearing officer's finding of fact, the presumptive sanction, or the sanction analysis, but rather questioned the fairness of the disciplinary proceedings. The Court found his arguments to be unsubstantiated and that Mr. King's guilty plea was properly given preclusive effect under ELC 10.4(c).
Mr. King's conduct violated RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting a lawyer from committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; and RPC 8.4(i), prohibiting a lawyer from committing any act involving moral turpitude, or corruption, or any other act which reflects disregard for the rule of law.
Scott G. Busby represented the Bar Association. John R. Scannell represented Mr. King at hearing and before the Disciplinary Board. Mr. King represented himself on appeal to the Supreme Court. Carl J. Carlson was the hearing officer. |