San Francisco
Case Number(s): 11-C-14997
In the Matter of: Keith R. Lee, Bar # 160985, A Member of the State Bar of California, (Respondent).
Counsel For The State Bar: Rebecca Thompson
Deputy Trial Counsel
180 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 538-2346
Bar # 173202
Counsel for Respondent: In Pro Per Respondent
Keith R. Lee
150 Gardenside Drive, No. 103
San Francisco, CA 94131
(415) 609-0450
Bar # 160985
Submitted to: Settlement Judge, State Bar Court Clerk’s Office, San Francisco.
Filed: May 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.
1. Respondent is a member of the State Bar of California, admitted December 14, 1992.
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 10 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. Costs are added to membership fee for calendar year following effective date of discipline (public reproval).
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.
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.
<<not>> 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.
(Effective January 1, 2011)
Reproval
IN THE MATTER OF: Keith R. Lee, State Bar No. 160985
STATE BAR COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-C-14997
Facts
1. On December 12, 2010, Respondent was driving on the freeway in Sonoma County, California, when a driver made a lane change into Respondent’s lane in front of Respondent. Respondent alleges the driver caused him to brake hard to avoid a collision. Respondent followed the driver off the freeway, where both parties exited their cars. Respondent and the driver had a verbal altercation, in which Respondent yelled an obscenity at the driver and kicked her Jeep twice. Respondent left the scene before the police officer arrived.
2. On March 28, 2011, criminal charges were filed in Sonoma County Superior Court, Case No. SCR599913.
3. On July 20, 2011, Respondent pled no contest to violating Penal Code section 594(a) (vandalism), a misdemeanor.
4. Respondent was sentenced to a twenty-four (24) month conditional sentence, ordered to have no contact with the driver, assessed fines, ordered to pay $2,018.00 in restitution, and sentenced to two (2) days in jail, credit for time served.
5. Prior to Respondent’s plea of no contest, he paid the driver the full restitution in the amount of $2,018.00".
Conclusions of Law
Respondent violated Penal Code section 594(a), in violation of Business and Professions Code section 6068(a). For purposes of settlement, the parties stipulate that Respondent did not commit an act of moral turpitude; however, Respondent committed other misconduct warranting discipline.
PENDING PROCEEDINGS
The disclosure date referred to, on Page 2, paragraph A(7), was May 7, 2012.
STATE BAR ETHICS SCHOOL
Based on Respondent’s agreement to attend State Bar Ethics School as part of this stipulation, Respondent may receive Minimum Continuing Education credit upon satisfactory completion of State Bar Ethics School.
(Effective January 1, 2011)
FACTS SUPPORTING AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
There are no aggravating circumstances.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Standard 1.2(e)(i). Respondent was admitted to the State Bar of California on December 14, 1992. He has no prior record of discipline in over nineteen (19) years of practice.
Standard 1.2(e)(v). Respondent displayed spontaneous candor and cooperation to the State Bar during the disciplinary proceedings.
Standard 1.2(e)(vii). Respondent displayed remorse for his conduct.
SUPPORTING AUTHORITY
Standard 3.4 states, as follows: "Final conviction of a member of a crime which does not involve moral turpitude inherently or in the facts and circumstances surrounding the crime’s commission but which does involve other misconduct warranting discipline shall result in a sanction as prescribed under part B of these standards appropriate to the nature and extent of the misconduct found to have been committed by the member."
Part B, Standard 2.10, requires that a violation of any provision of the Business and Professions Code not specified in these standards (e.g., Business and Professions Code section 6068(a)) shall result in reproval or suspension according to the gravity of the offense or harm, if any, to the victim, with due regard to the purposes of imposing discipline set forth in standard 1.3. Based on the mitigation in this matter and the lack of aggravation, a private reproval is the appropriate level of discipline in this matter.
In the Matter of: Case Number(s):
Keith R. Lee 11-C- 14997
Medical Conditions
a. Unless Respondent has been terminated from the Lawyer Assistance Program ("LAP") prior to respondent’s successful completion of the LAP, respondent must comply with all provisions and conditions of respondent’s Participation Agreement with the LAP and must provide an appropriate waiver authorizing the LAP to provide the Office of Probation arid this court with information regarding the terms and conditions of respondent’s participation in the LAP and respondent’s compliance or non- compliance with LAP requirements. Revocation of the written waiver for release of LAP information is a violation of this condition. However, if respondent has successfully completed the LAP, respondent need not comply with this condition.
Checked b.Respondent must obtain psychiatric or psychological help/treatment from a duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker at respondent’s own expense a minimum of two (2) times per month and must furnish evidence to the Office of Probation that respondent is so complying with each quarterly report. Help/treatment should commence immediately, and in any event, no later than thirty (30) days after the effective date of the discipline in this matter. Treatment must continue forxxxxxx~xxxxxxx~xx year the period of probation or until a motion to modify this condition is granted and that ruling becomes final.
If the treating psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker determines that there has been a substantial change in respondent’s condition, respondent or Office of the Chief Trial Counsel may file a motion for modification of this condition with the Hearing Department of the State Bar Court, pursuant to rule 5.300 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Bar. The motion must be supported by a written statement from the psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker, by affidavit or under penalty of perjury, in support of the proposed modification.
C.Upon the request of the Office of Probation, respondent must provide the Office of Probation with medical waivers and access to all of respondent’s medical records. Revocation of any medical waiver is a violation of this condition. Any medical records obtained by the Office of Probation are confidential and no information concerning them or their contents will be given to anyone except members of the Office of Probation, Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, and the State Bar Court, who are directly involved with maintaining, enforcing or adjudicating this condition.
Other:
Pursuant to paragraph (b), above, Respondent shall obtain psychological treatment from Louis Morello, Ph.D. ("Dr. Morello"). Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of discipline in this matter, Respondent must provide Dr. Morello with a copy of this stipulation. Respondent must ensure that Dr. Morello provides a written acknowledgment of receipt of the stipulation, indicating the date of receipt, in conjunction with Dr. Morello’s submission of his first report due to the Office of Probation. Respondent’s treatment with Dr. Morello shall include treatment in the area of anger management. Consistent with paragraph (b), above, Respondent shall furnish evidence from Dr. Morello to the Office of Probation stating that Respondent is complying with the required treatment in anger management. In the event that Respondent elects to terminate treatment with Dr. Morello, Respondent must first obtain prior approval from the Office of Probation regarding treatment with another duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker. Within thirty (30) days from the effective date of discipline in this matter, Respondent must provide a copy of this stipulation to the new duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or clinical social worker. Respondent must ensure that the new duly licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or (Effective January 1, 2011) Medical Conditions clinical social worker provides a written acknowledgment of receipt of the stipulation, indicating the date of receipt, in conjunction with his or her submission of his or her first report due to the Office of Probation (Effective January 1, 2011).
Case Number(s): 11-C-14997
In the Matter of: Keith R. Lee
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: Keith R. Lee
Date: 5/7/2012
Deputy Trial Counsel: Rebecca Thompson
Date:5/7/12
Case Number(s): 11-C-14997
In the Matter of: Keith R. Lee
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.
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:
Judge of the State Bar Court: Lucy Armendariz
Date: May 10, 2012
[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 May 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:
Keith R. Lee
150 Gardenside DR Apt 103
San Francisco, CA 94131
checked. by interoffice mail through a facility regularly maintained by the State Bar of California addressed as follows:
Rebecca M. Thompson, Enforcement, San Francisco
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in San Francisco, California, on May 10, 2012.
Signed by:
Lauretta Cramer
Case Administrator
State Bar Court