State Bar Court of California

Hearing Department

STIPULATION RE FACTS, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DISPOSITION AND ORDER APPROVING

REPROVAL

Case Number(s): 11-C-14560-LMA

In the Matter of: Steven J. Brooks Bar # 104247, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).

Counsel For The State Bar: Anthony G. Matricciani, Bar # 214730, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94104

Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent, Steven J. Brookes, 435 North Main Street, Lakeport, California 95453, Bar # 104247

Submitted to: Assigned Judge, State Bar Court Clerk’s Office San Francisco

Filed: January 10, 2012

  <<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 December 3, 1982

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):

checked. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).

<<not>> checked. Case ineligible for costs (private reproval).

<<not>> checked. Costs are to be paid in equal amounts prior to February 1 for the following membership years: **.  (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.

9. The parties understand that:

<<not>> checked.  (a) A private reproval imposed on a respondent as a result of a stipulation approved by the Court prior to initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, but is not disclosed in response to public inquiries and is not reported on the State Bar’s web page. The record of the proceeding in which such a private reproval was imposed is not available to the public except as part of the record of any subsequent proceeding in which it is introduced as evidence of a prior record of discipline under the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar.

<<not>> checked. (b) A private reproval imposed on a respondent after initiation of a State Bar Court proceeding is part of the respondent’s official State Bar Membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.

checked. (c) A public reproval imposed on a respondent is publicly available as part of the respondent’s official State Bar membership records, is disclosed in response to public inquiries and is reported as a record of public discipline on the State Bar’s web page.

B. Aggravating Circumstances [for definition, see Standards for Attorney Sanctions for Professional Misconduct, standard 1.2(b)]. Facts supporting aggravating circumstances are required.

<<not>> checked. (1) Prior record of discipline [see standard 1.2(f)].

<<not>> checked. (a)    State Bar Court case # of prior case

<<not>> checked. (b)    Date prior discipline effective .

<<not>> checked. (c)    Rules of Professional Conduct/ State Bar Act violations:

<<not>> checked. (d)    Degree of prior discipline

<<not>> checked. (e)    If Respondent has two or more incidents of prior discipline, use space provided below or a separate attachment entitled “Prior Discipline”. .

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. While tidying under the influence of alcohol, Respondent crossed the center line and collided with oncoming traffic - an occupied truck. He left the scene of the collision in violation of Vehicle Code § 20002(a). During the investigation of the collision, Respondent told a California Highway Patrol Officer there was no damage to the truck, he and the driver of the truck knew each other, and he promised he would take care of the matter later because he had to get home. The driver of the truck told the officer that it was too dark for her to see the driver of the car, and the driver drove away suddenly without exchanging information.

<<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.

checked. (4)            Harm:  Respondent's misconduct harmed significantly a client, the public or the administration of justice. Two occupants of the vehicle Respondent struck suffered minor injuries. Two occupants of the vehicle Respondent struck suffered minor injuries.

<<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: None.

C. Mitigating Circumstances [see standard 1.2(e)]. Facts supporting mitigating circumstances are required.

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. 

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.  Respondent promptly accepted criminal liability after the filing of charges and agreed to pay restitution for damage to the vehicle he struck and medical care of the occupants who were injured.

<<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.

<<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.

<<not>> 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.

<<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: None

D. Discipline:

<<not>> checked. (1)  Private reproval (check applicable conditions, if any, below):

<<not>> checked. (a) Approved by the Court prior to initiation of the State Bar Court proceedings (no public disclosure).

<<not>> checked. (b)Approved by the Court after initiation of the State Bar Court proceedings (public disclosure).

or

checked. (2)                Public reproval (Check applicable conditions, if any below)

E. Additional Conditions of Reproval:

checked. (1)            Respondent must comply with the conditions attached to the reproval for a period of 1 year.

checked. (2)            During the condition period attached to the reproval, 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 the condition period.

<<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 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 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.

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 State Bar Ethics School, and passage of the test given at the end of that session.

<<not>> checked. No Ethics School recommended.  Reason:

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.

checked. (10) 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 within one year of the effective date of the reproval. 

<<not>> checked. No MPRE recommended.  Reason:

<<not>> checked. (11) 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:

Attachment language (if any):

Participation In Abstinence-Based Support Group

Mr. Brookes agrees to attend at least eight (8) meetings per month of an abstinence-based support group. Appropriate support groups include Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, LifeRing, S.M.A.R.T., and S.O.S. Other support groups are acceptable when they include: (1) a subculture to support recovery that includes participation in meetings; and (2) a process of personal development that does not have financial barriers. (See O’Conner v. California (C.D. Calif. 1994) 855 F. Supp. 303 (No first amendment violation when probationer given choice between AA and secular program).) The "Moderation Management" program is not acceptable because it allows the participant to continue consuming alcohol.

(Effective January 1, 2011)

STIPULATION FOR PUBLIC REPROVAL ATTACHMENT

In the Matter of Steven J. Brookes

Case Number 11-C-14560 

PROCEDURAL STATEMENT

A. Procedural Statement

1. This is a proceeding pursuant to Business & Professions Code 99 6101 and 6102 and rule 9.10 of the California Rules of Court.

2. On July 25, 2011, Respondent was convicted of violating Vehicle Code 9 23152(b) and the allegations of violating Vehicle Code 99 23152(a) and 20002(a) were dismissed.

3. On October 31, 2011, the Review Department of the State Bar Court issued an order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 9.10(a) referring the matter to the Hearing Department to recommend discipline if the Hearing Department determines that the facts and circumstances surrounding the misdemeanor violation of Vehicle Code § 23152(b) involved moral turpitude or other misconduct warranting discipline.

II. FACTS AND LEGAL CONCLUSIONS

A. Factual Statement

On February 10, 2011 at approximately 7:11 p.m., Steven J. Brookes drove his car on Main Street in Kelseyville, California while under the influence of alcohol in violation of Vehicle Code § 23152(b). While driving, Mr. Brookes crossed the center line and struck oncoming traffic causing damage to a pickup truck that had four passengers. After the collision, Mr. Brookes drove away without stopping or exchanging information as required by Vehicle Code § 20002(a).

A California Highway Patrol officer found Mr. Brookes approximately three blocks from the collision site. Mr. Brookes admitted to the officer that he was the driver who had struck the occupied truck. However, Mr. Brookes left the scene without stopping. He said there was no damage to the truck, he and the driver of the truck knew each other, and he promised he would take care of the matter later because he had to get home. The driver of the truck told the officer that it was too dark for her to see the driver of the car, and the driver drove away suddenly without exchanging information. During the investigation, Mr. Brookes submitted to a breath test by a Preliminary Alcohol Screening device and the result indicated that Mr. Brookes’s blood alcohol content was .16%. The truck sustained minor damage and two passengers sustained minor injuries.

B. Conclusions Of Law And Supporting Authority

The crime for which Mr. Brookes was convicted does not involve moral turpitude, but the facts and circumstances surrounding the conviction involve misconduct warranting discipline.

Supporting Authority

Standard 3.4 Conviction Of A Crime Not Involving Moral Turpitude But Involving Other Misconduct Warranting Discipline

In re Kelley (1990) 52 Cal.3d 487

Standard 1.2 (b)(iii), (iv) Aggravating Circumstances

Standard 1.2 (e)(i), (vii) Mitigating Circumstances

It is appropriate for disciplinary purposes to consider any criminal charges that were dismissed as well as the charges for which the attorney was actually convicted. (In the Matter of Carr (Review Dept. 1992) 2 Cal.StateBarCt.Rptr. 108.)

III. PENDING DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

There are not any other disciplinary proceedings pending against Mr. Brookes as of December 22, 2011. The disclosure date referenced in the Stipulation For Public Reproval, subdivision A, paragraph (7) is December 22, 2011.

IV. COST OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

Respondent acknowledges that the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel has informed respondent that as of December 22, 2011, the prosecution costs in this matter are $2,287.00. 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.

SIGNATURE OF THE PARTIES

Case Number(s): 11-C-14560

In the Matter of: Steven J. Brookes, State Bar No. 104247

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: Steven J. Brookes, Anthony G. Matricciani

Respondent: Steven J. Brookes

Date: December 30, 2011

Respondent’s Counsel:  N/A

Date: N/A

Deputy Trial Counsel: Anthony G. Matricciani

Date: January 6, 2011

REPROVAL ORDER

Case Number(s): 11-C-14560

In the Matter of: Steven J. Brookes

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 REPROVAL IMPOSED.

<<not>> checked. The stipulated facts and disposition are APPROVED AS MODIFIED as set forth below, and the REPROVAL IMPOSED.

checked. All court dates in the Hearing Department are vacated.

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.) Otherwise the stipulation shall be effective 15 days after service of this order.

Failure to comply with any conditions attached to this reproval man constitute cause for a separate proceeding for willful breach of rule 1-110, Rules of Professional Conduct.

Signed by: Lucy Armendariz

Judge of the State Bar Court: Lucy Armendariz

Date: January 10, 2012

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 San Francisco, on January 10, 2012, 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 San Francisco, California, addressed as follows:

STEVEN JOHN BROOKES
435 N MAIN ST
LAKEPORT, CA 95453

Checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:

ANTHONY G. MATRICCIANI, Enforcement, San Francisco

I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on January 10, 2012.

Signed by Bernadette C.O. Molina

Case Administrator

State Bar Court