| Description: |
Curtis A. Shelton (WSBA No. 9629, admitted 1979), of Vancouver, was disbarred, effective September 15, 2004, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following a hearing. This discipline was based on his conduct in 2001 involving failure to avoid multiple conflicts of interest; testifying untruthfully under oath; advancing prohibited financial assistance to a client; violating the oath of attorney; and using means that had no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person.
Mr. Shelton represented Client A, who had been charged in two matters with multiple criminal offenses involving, inter alia, possession and delivery of methamphetamine in Clark County Superior Court. Mr. Shelton also represented Client B, who had been charged in two matters with multiple criminal offenses involving manufacturing, possession of, and delivery of methamphetamine in Clark County Superior Court. Prior to commencing either representation, Mr. Shelton knew that Client B regularly supplied Client A with methamphetamine.
Over a period of several months, before and during Mr. Shelton’s representation of them, both Client A and Client B supplied Mr. Shelton with controlled substances, including methamphetamine, for his personal use. Mr. Shelton used illegal controlled substances, in his office and elsewhere, with Client A and Client B.
In April 2001, Mr. Shelton represented Client A at trial in both matters. In each instance, Client B paid Mr. Shelton to represent Client A.
Following the trials, another lawyer appeared in both matters on behalf of Client A. The lawyer filed motions for new trial in both cases. The court ordered new trials because Mr. Shelton’s simultaneous representation of Client A and Client B, when their legal positions and interests were likely adverse, resulted in a conflict of interest. Mr. Shelton had not disclosed to Client A the material facts regarding possible conflicts of interest, nor did he obtain the client’s written consent to the conflicts.
In June and July 2001, while representing Client B, Mr. Shelton paid Client B’s landlord $1,300 for rent, which payments constituted loans to Client B.
In July 2001, Client B was charged in federal district court with possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. At an arraignment in August 2001, Mr. Shelton appeared on behalf of Client B. Attorneys for the United States filed a motion for an in camera hearing regarding Mr. Shelton’s ability to represent Client B. In October 2001, the federal district court conducted an in camera hearing to address the issue of Mr. Shelton’s conflict of interest. During the in camera hearing, Mr. Shelton untruthfully testified under oath that he and Client B had never used methamphetamine in Mr. Shelton’s office, that he had never used methamphetamine in the presence of Client A, and that Client B had never provided him with methamphetamine for his own personal use. At the conclusion of the in camera hearing, the court found a possible conflict of interest, discharged Mr. Shelton, and appointed a new lawyer for Client B. Mr. Shelton had not disclosed to Client B the material facts regarding possible conflicts of interest, nor did he obtain the client’s written consent to the conflicts.
In August 2001, while representing Client B, Mr. Shelton telephoned one of the lawyers who had substituted as counsel for Client A. During the course of the telephone conversation, Mr. Shelton made a number of gratuitously offensive, abusive, and scurrilous remarks to the lawyer.
Mr. Shelton’s conduct violated RPC 1.7(a) and (b), prohibiting a lawyer from representing a client if the representation will be directly adverse to another client or if the representation may be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client or the lawyer’s own interests, unless the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected and the client consents in writing after a full disclosure; RPC 1.8(e), prohibiting, except in specified circumstances, a lawyer from advancing or guaranteeing financial assistance to a client in connection with contemplated or pending litigation; RPC 1.8(f), prohibiting a lawyer from accepting compensation for representing a client from one other than the client (unless the client consents after consultation, there is no interference with the lawyer’s independence of professional judgment or the client-lawyer relationship, and confidential client information is protected); RPC 3.3(a), prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly making a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal; RPC 4.4, prohibiting a lawyer, in representing a client, from using means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person; RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting commission of a criminal act (namely perjury, false swearing, and false declaration) that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or misrepresentation; RPC 8.4(d), prohibiting conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and former RLD 1.1(c), subjecting a lawyer to discipline for violation of his or her oath or duties as a lawyer.
Randy Beitel and Sachia Stonefeld Powell represented the Bar Association. Mr. Shelton represented himself. Peter A. Matty was the hearing officer. |