State Bar Court of California
Hearing Department
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER
APPROVING
ACTUAL SUSPENSION
Case Number(s): 10-N-08974
In the Matter of: Richard J. Stintstrom, Bar # 140675, A Member
of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Monique T. Miller, DTC, The
State Bar of California, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, 1149 S. Hill Street,
Los Angeles, CA 90015, Tel: (213) 765-1334, Bar # 212469
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Richard J.
Stinstrom, P.O. Box 61032, Irvine, CA 92602, Tel: (951) 288-2847, Bar # 140675
Submitted to: Assigned Judge – State Bar Court Clerk’s
Office Los Angeles.
Filed: January 20, 2011.
<<not>> checked. PREVIOUS STIPULATION REJECTED
Note: All
information required by this form and any additional information which cannot
be provided in the space provided, must be set forth in an attachment to this
stipulation under specific headings, e.g., "Facts,"
"Dismissals," "Conclusions of Law," "Supporting
Authority," etc.
A. Parties'
Acknowledgments:
1. Respondent is
a member of the State Bar of California, admitted June 6, 1989.
2. The parties
agree to be bound by the factual stipulations contained herein even if
conclusions of law or disposition are rejected or changed by the Supreme Court.
3. All
investigations or proceedings listed by case number in the caption of this
stipulation are entirely resolved by this stipulation and are deemed consolidated.
Dismissed charge(s)/count(s) are listed under "Dismissals." The
stipulation consists of 9 pages, not including the order.
4. A statement of
acts or omissions acknowledged by Respondent as cause or causes for discipline
is included under "Facts."
5. Conclusions of
law, drawn from and specifically referring to the facts are also included under
"Conclusions of Law".
6. The parties
must include supporting authority for the recommended level of discipline under
the heading "Supporting Authority."
7. No more than
30 days prior to the filing of this stipulation, Respondent has been advised in
writing of any pending investigation/proceeding not resolved by this
stipulation, except for criminal investigations.
8. Payment of
Disciplinary Costs-Respondent acknowledges the provisions of Bus. & Prof.
Code §§6086.10 & 6140.7. (Check one option only):
<<not>>
checked. Until costs are paid in full, Respondent will remain actually
suspended from the practice of law unless relief is obtained per rule 5.130,
Rules of Procedure.
checked.
Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following
membership years: 2012 and 2013. (Hardship, special circumstances or
other good cause per rule 5.132, Rules of Procedure.) If Respondent fails
to pay any installment as described above, or as may be modified by the State
Bar Court, the remaining balance is due and payable immediately.
<<not>>
checked. Costs are waived in part as set forth in a separate attachment
entitled "Partial Waiver of Costs".
<<not>>
checked. Costs are entirely waived.
B. Aggravating Circumstances
[for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional
Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are
required.
checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)]
checked.
(a)
State Bar Court case # of prior case 07-O-12983 (S181616).
checked.
(b)
Date prior discipline effective 06/20/2010.
checked.
(c)
Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations: Two counts of B&P
6106 and 1 count of B&P 6068(i)
checked.
(d)
Degree of prior discipline 4 years stayed suspension, 5 years probation and 2
years actual suspension and standard 1.4(c)(ii)
<<not>> checked. (e) If
Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided
below.
<<not>> checked. (2) Dishonesty: Respondent's
misconduct was surrounded by or followed by bad faith, dishonesty, concealment,
overreaching or other violations of the State Bar Act or Rules of Professional
Conduct.
<<not>> checked. (3) Trust Violation: Trust funds or
property were involved and Respondent refused or was unable to account to the
client or person who was the object of the misconduct for improper conduct
toward said funds or property.
<<not>> checked. (4) Harm: Respondent's misconduct
harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice.
<<not>> checked. (5) Indifference: Respondent
demonstrated indifference toward rectification of or atonement for the
consequences of his or her misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (6) Lack of Cooperation: Respondent
displayed a lack of candor and cooperation to victims of his/her misconduct or
to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation or proceedings.
<<not>> checked. (7) Multiple/Pattern of Misconduct:
Respondent's current misconduct evidences multiple acts of wrongdoing or
demonstrates a pattern of misconduct.
<<not>> checked. (8) No aggravating circumstances are involved.
Additional aggravating circumstances:
C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts
supporting mitigating circumstances are required.
<<not>>
checked. (1) No Prior Discipline: Respondent has no
prior record of discipline over many years of practice coupled with present
misconduct which is not deemed serious.
<<not>>
checked. (2) No Harm: Respondent did not harm the
client or person who was the object of the misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. (3) Candor/Cooperation: Respondent displayed
spontaneous candor and cooperation with the victims of his/her misconduct and
to the State Bar during disciplinary investigation and proceedings.
<<not>>
checked. (4) Remorse: Respondent promptly took
objective steps spontaneously demonstrating remorse and recognition of the
wrongdoing, which steps were designed to timely atone for any consequences of
his/her misconduct.
<<not>>
checked. (5) Restitution: Respondent paid $ on in
restitution to without the threat or force of disciplinary, civil or criminal
proceedings.
<<not>>
checked. (6) Delay: These disciplinary proceedings were
excessively delayed. The delay is not attributable to Respondent and the
delay prejudiced him/her.
<<not>>
checked. (7) Good Faith: Respondent acted in good
faith.
<<not>>
checked. (8) Emotional/Physical Difficulties: At the
time of the stipulated act or acts of professional misconduct Respondent
suffered extreme emotional difficulties or physical disabilities which expert
testimony would establish was directly responsible for the misconduct.
The difficulties or disabilities were not the product of any illegal conduct by
the member, such as illegal drug or substance abuse, and Respondent no longer suffers
from such difficulties or disabilities.
<<not>>
checked. (9) Severe Financial Stress: At the time of
the misconduct, Respondent suffered from severe financial stress which resulted
from circumstances not reasonably foreseeable or which were beyond his/her
control and which were directly responsible for the misconduct. Respondent has
been living in a shelter with his wife and teenage daughter since December
2009. The shelter’s rules require that its residents keep the shelter’s address
confidential. The shelter assists its residents in getting back on their feet
by requiring extensive participation in employment counseling groups meetings,
survival sessions, and training workshops. The Supreme Court Order S181616,
filed 5/21/2010, was received at Respondent’s mailbox, which is about 3 miles
from the shelter. As a result of lack of adequate transportation and a rigorous
schedule at the shelter, Respondent failed to timely check his mail and filed
his 9.20 affidavit three-and-a-half months late.
<<not>>
checked. (10) Family Problems: At the time of the misconduct, Respondent
suffered extreme difficulties in his/her personal life which were other than
emotional or physical in nature.
checked.
(11) Good Character: Respondent's good character is attested to by a wide
range of references in the legal and general communities who are aware of the
full extent of his/her misconduct. The State Bar received declarations from
four attorneys, two real estate agents, a Pepperdine University economics
professor, the associate pastor at Trinity United Presbyterian Church in Santa
Ana, and a physical chemist, who are aware of Respondent’s misconduct in his
prior discipline and who all attest to his good character. Respondent has also
been actively participating in events to raise donations for foundations such
as the Make-A-Wish Foundation.
<<not>>
checked. (12) Rehabilitation: Considerable time has passed since the acts
of professional misconduct occurred followed by convincing proof of subsequent
rehabilitation.
<<not>>
checked. (13) No mitigating circumstances are involved.
Additional mitigating circumstances:
D.
Discipline:
checked.
(1) Stayed
Suspension:
checked. (a) Respondent must be
suspended from the practice of law for a period of three (3) years.
<<not>> checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof
satisfactory to the State Bar Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to
practice and present learning and ability in the law pursuant to standard
1.4(c)(ii) Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
<<not>> checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution
as set forth in the Financial Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>> checked. iii. and until Respondent does the
following:
checked. (b) The
above-referenced suspension is stayed.
<<not>> checked. (2) Probation: Respondent must be
placed on probation for a period of three (3) years, which will commence upon
the effective date of the Supreme Court order in this matter. (See rule
9.18, California Rules of Court.)
checked. (3) Actual Suspension:
checked. (a) Respondent must be actually suspended from the practice of law
in the State of California for a period of one (1) year.
<<not>> checked. i. and until Respondent shows proof
satisfactory to the State Bar Court of rehabilitation and present fitness to
practice and present learning and ability in the law pursuant to standard
1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct
<<not>> checked. ii. and until Respondent pays restitution as
set forth in the Financial Conditions form attached to this stipulation.
<<not>> checked. iii. and until Respondent does the following:
E. Additional Conditions of Probation:
<<not>>
checked. (1) If Respondent is actually suspended for two years or
more, he/she must remain actually suspended until he/she proves to the State
Bar Court his/her rehabilitation, fitness to practice, and learning and ability
in the general law, pursuant to standard 1.4(c)(ii), Standards for Attorney
Sanctions for Professional Misconduct.
checked.
(2)
During the probation period, Respondent must comply with the provisions of the
State Bar Act and Rules of Professional Conduct.
checked.
(3)
Within ten (10) days of any change, Respondent must report to the Membership
Records Office of the State Bar and to the Office of Probation of the State Bar
of California ("Office of Probation"), all changes of information,
including current office address and telephone number, or other address for State
Bar purposes, as prescribed by section 6002.1 of the Business and Professions
Code.
checked.
(4)
Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of discipline, Respondent must
contact the Office of Probation and schedule a meeting with Respondent's
assigned probation deputy to discuss these terms and conditions of probation.
Upon the direction of the Office of Probation, Respondent must meet with the
probation deputy either in-person or by telephone. During the period of
probation, Respondent must promptly meet with the probation deputy as directed
and upon request.
checked.
(5)
Respondent must submit written quarterly reports to the Office of Probation on
each January 10, April 10, July 10, and October 10 of the period of probation.
Under penalty of perjury, Respondent must state whether Respondent has complied
with the State Bar Act, the Rules of Professional Conduct, and all conditions
of probation during the preceding calendar quarter. Respondent must also state
whether there are any proceedings pending against him or her in the State Bar
Court and if so, the case number and current status of that proceeding. If the
first report would cover less than 30 days, that report must be submitted on
the next quarter date, and cover the extended period.
In addition to all quarterly reports, a final report, containing the same
information, is due no earlier than twenty (20) days before the last day of the
period of probation and no later than the last day of probation.
<<not>>
checked. (6) Respondent must be assigned a probation monitor.
Respondent must promptly review the terms and conditions of probation with the
probation monitor to establish a manner and schedule of compliance. During the
period of probation, Respondent must furnish to the monitor such reports as may
be requested, in addition to the quarterly reports required to be submitted to
the Office of Probation. Respondent must cooperate fully with the probation
monitor.
checked.
(7)
Subject to assertion of applicable privileges, Respondent must answer fully,
promptly and truthfully any inquiries of the Office of Probation and any
probation monitor assigned under these conditions which are directed to
Respondent personally or in writing relating to whether Respondent is complying
or has complied with the probation conditions.
<<not>>
checked. (8) Within one (1) year of the effective date of the
discipline herein, Respondent must provide to the Office of Probation
satisfactory proof of attendance at a session of the Ethics School, and passage
of the test given at the end of that session.
checked No Ethics School recommended. Reason:
Respondent is already required to take and pass Ethics School within one
year of the Supreme Court Order S181616 effective 6/20/2010.
<<not>>
checked. (9) Respondent must comply with all conditions of
probation imposed in the underlying criminal matter and must so declare under
penalty of perjury in conjunction with any quarterly report to be filed with
the Office of Probation.
<<not>>
checked. (10) The following conditions are attached hereto and incorporated:
<<not>> checked. Substance Abuse Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Law Office Management Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Medical Conditions.
<<not>> checked. Financial Conditions.
F.
Other Conditions Negotiated by the Parties:
<<not>> checked. (1) Multistate Professional
Responsibility Examination: Respondent must provide proof of passage of
the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination ("MPRE"),
administered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, to the Office of
Probation during the period of actual suspension or within one year, whichever
period is longer. Failure to pass the MPRE results in actual suspension
without further hearing until passage. But see rule 9.10(b), California Rules
of Court, and rule 5.162(A) & (E), Rules of Procedure.
checked. No MPRE
recommended. Reason: Respondent is already required to take and pass the
MPRE within one year of the Supreme Court Order S181616, effective 6/20/2010.
<<not>> checked. (2) Rule 9.20, California
Rules of Court: Respondent must comply with the requirements of rule
9.20, California Rules of Court, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions
(a) and (c) of that rule within 30 and 40 calendar days, respectively, after
the effective date of the Supreme Court's Order in this matter.
<<not>> checked. (3) Conditional Rule 9.20,
California Rules of Court: If Respondent remains actually suspended for
90 days or more, he/she must comply with the requirements of rule 9.20,
California Rules of Court, and perform the acts specified in subdivisions (a)
and (c) of that rule within 120 and 130 calendar days, respectively, after the
effective date of the Supreme Court's Order in this matter.
<<not>> checked. (4) Credit for Interim
Suspension [conviction referral cases only]: Respondent will be credited
for the period of his/her interim suspension toward the stipulated period of
actual suspension. Date of commencement of interim suspension:
<<not>> checked. (5) Other Conditions:
Attachment language (if any):
ATTACHMENT TO
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION
IN THE MATTER OF: Richard J. Stinitstrom, State Bar No.
10-N-08974
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 10-N-08974
WAIVER OF VARIANCE BETWEEN NOTICE OF DISCIPLINARY CHARGES
AND STIPULATED FACTS AND CULPABILITY
The parties hereby waive any variance between the Notice of
Disciplinary Charges filed on December 13, 2010, and the facts and conclusions
of law contained in this stipulation.
Additionally, the parties waive the issuance of an amended
Notice of Disciplinary Charges relating to the case that is the subject matter
of this stipulation.
Respondent admits that the following facts are true and that
he is culpable of violations of the specified statutes and/or Rules of
Professional Conduct.
FACTS
1. On May 21, 2010, the California Supreme Court filed Order
No. S 181616 (hereinafter "9.20 Order"). The 9.20 Order included a
requirement that Respondent comply with Rule 9.20, California Rules of Court,
by performing the acts specified in subdivisions (a) and (c) within 30 and 40
days, respectively, after the effective date of the 9.20 Order.
2. On May 21, 2010, the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the
State of California properly served upon Respondent a copy of the 9.20 Order.
Respondent received the 9.20 Order.
3. The Supreme Court Order became effective on June 20, 2010
thirty days after the 9.20 Order was filed. Thus Respondent was ordered to
comply with subdivision (a) and/or (b) of rule 9.20 of the California Rules of
Court no later than July 20, 2010, and was ordered to comply with subdivision
(c) of Rule 9.20 no later than July 30, 2010.
4. Respondent filed his 9:20 affidavit on November 17, 2010.
5. Respondent failed to timely file with the clerk of the
State Bar Court a declaration of compliance with Rule 9.20 (a) and (b),
California Rules of Court, as required by Rule 9.20(c).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
6. By not filing a declaration of compliance with Rule 9.20
in conformity with the provisions of Supreme Court Order No. S 181616 requiring
compliance with Rule 9.20, Respondent willfully violated rule 9.20, California
Rules of Court.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS.
The disclosure date referred to, on page 2, paragraph A(7),
was January 14, 2011.
COSTS OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial
Counsel has informed Respondent that as of January 14, 2011, the prosecution costs
in this matter are $1,641. Respondent further acknowledges that should this
stipulation be rejected or should relief from the stipulation be granted, the
costs in this matter may increase due to the cost of further proceedings.
AUTHORITIES SUPPORTING DISCIPLINE
Standard 1.7(a) provides that, when a member has one prior
imposition of discipline, the degree of discipline imposed in the current
proceeding shall be greater than that imposed in the prior discipline. In In Re
Ronald Robert Silverton (2005)36 Cal.4th 81, 91-92, the Supreme Court stated
that the standards are to be given great weight because they promote
consistency and the State Bar Court should follow the guidance of the Standards
for Attorney sanctions whenever possible.
Standard 1.6(b)(ii) states that a lesser degree of
discipline is appropriate when "[m]itigating circumstances are found to
surround the particular act of misconduct...and the net effect of those
mitigating circumstances, by themselves and in balance with any aggravating
circumstances found, demonstrates that the purpose of imposing sanctions set
forth in standard 1.3 will be properly fulfilled if a lesser degree of sanction
is imposed."
In In the Matter of Van Sickle (Review Dept. 2006) 4 Cal.
State Bar Ct. Rptr. 980, 994, the Review Department found that "we are
permitted to temper the letter of the law with considerations peculiar to the
offense and the offender."
Case Law on Rule 9.20 violations:
In Shapiro v. State Bar (1990)51 Cal.3d 251, the attorney
sought review of a decision by the Review Department that he be actually
suspended for two years, based on findings that he had willfully violated rule
955 for filing the compliance affidavit five months late, arising out of
discipline previously imposed for misconduct in three separate client matters.
The Supreme Court ordered the attorney suspended for two years stayed
suspension and two years probation on the condition of one year actual
suspension. The court found substantial evidence in mitigation, including 16
years in practice without a record, serious problems during the relevant time
period that the attorney had overcome, and testimony from experienced
practicing attorneys who, aware of the attorney’s misconduct, testified to his
good character.
SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES
Case Number(s): Richard J. Stinstrom
In the Matter of: 10-N-08974
By their signatures below, the parties and their counsel, as
applicable, signify their agreement with each of the recitation and each of the
terms and conditions of this Stipulation Re Facts, Conclusions of Law and
Disposition.
Signed by:
Respondent: Richard J. Stinstrom
Date: January 19, 2011
Respondent’s Counsel:
Date:
Deputy Trial Counsel: Monique T. Miller
Date: January 19, 2011
ACTUAL SUSPENSION ORDER
Case Number(s): 10-N-08974
In the Matter of: Richard J. Stinstrom
Finding the stipulation to be fair to the parties and that
it adequately protects the public, IT IS ORDERED that the requested dismissal
of counts/charges, if any is GRANTED without prejudice, and:
checked. The stipulated facts and
disposition are APPROVED and the DISCIPLINE RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
checked. The stipulated facts and
disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the DISCIPLINE IS
RECOMMENDED to the Supreme Court.
checked. All Hearing dates are
vacated.
At page 6, after paragraph F(2),
insert the following:
“Respondent already complied with rule 9.20 in November 2010.”
The parties are bound by the stipulation as approved unless:
1) a motion to withdraw or modify the stipulation, filed within 15 days after
service of this order, is granted; or 2) this court modifies or further
modifies the approved stipulation. (See rule 5.58 (E) & (F), Rules of
Procedure.) The effective date of this disposition is the effective date of the
Supreme Court order herein, normally 30 days after the file date. (See rule
9.18(a), California Rules of Court.)
Signed by:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Richard A. Honn
Date: January 19. 2011
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
[Rules Proc. of State
Bar; Rule 5.27(B); Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(4)]
I am a Case Administrator of the State Bar Court of
California. I am over the age of eighteen and not a party to the within
proceeding. Pursuant to standard court practice, in the City and County of Los
Angeles, on January 20, 2011, I deposited a true copy of the following
document(s):
STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND
ORDER APPROVING
in a sealed envelope for collection and mailing on that date
as follows:
checked. by
first-class mail, with postage thereon fully prepaid, through the United States
Postal Service at Los Angeles, California, addressed as follows:
RICHARD J. STINSTROM
PO BOX 61032
IRVINE, CA 92602
<<not>>
checked. by certified mail, No. with return receipt requested, through
the United States Postal Service at California, addressed as follows:
<<not>>
checked. by overnight mail at, California, addressed as follows:
<<not>>
checked. by fax transmission, at fax number. No error was reported by the fax
machine that I used.
<<not>>
checked. By personal service by leaving the documents in a sealed envelope or
package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served with a
receptionist or a person having charge of the attorney’s office, addressed as
follows:
checked. by
interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of
California addressed as follows:
Mia R. Ellis, Enforcement, Los Angeles
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed in Los Angeles, California, on January 20, 2011.
Signed by:
Cristina Potter
Case Administrator
State Bar Court