181 A.3d 218
Md.2018Background
- Claire L. K. K. Ogilvie, admitted to Maryland bar in 2007, was indicted in Charlottesville, VA, on counts of breaking and entering, malicious wounding, and abduction; she entered an Alford plea and was convicted and sentenced to 50 years (46 suspended).
- The Attorney Grievance Commission filed a petition under Md. Rule 19-738(c) seeking disciplinary action based on the Virginia convictions; the Court issued a show-cause order and temporarily suspended Ogilvie.
- Ogilvie responded arguing her convictions did not reflect on her honesty or fitness to practice and asked for no suspension or only a short suspension; she later did not appear for oral argument.
- Bar Counsel recommended disbarment, citing MARPC 19-308.4(b), (d), and (a), and noting aggravating factors: failure to report charges/conviction, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, victims’ vulnerability, and illegal conduct.
- The Court found the convictions conclusive under Md. Rule 19-738(i), concluded Ogilvie violated MARPC 19-308.4(a), (b), and (d), and imposed disbarment and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Respondent’s felony convictions constitute professional misconduct under MARPC 19-308.4(b) (criminal act reflecting adversely on honesty/trustworthiness) | Conviction for break-in, malicious wounding, and abduction reflects lack of trustworthiness and fitness; supports discipline up to disbarment | Convictions reflect on her personally but not on honesty/trustworthiness or fitness to practice; her incarceration experience improved her fitness | Court held convictions conclusively establish violations of MARPC 19-308.4(b) and show lack of trustworthiness |
| Whether Respondent’s conduct is prejudicial to administration of justice under MARPC 19-308.4(d) | Violent, illegal acts by an attorney harm public perception of the profession and courts | Respondent argued personal crimes need not relate to law practice to merit discipline | Court held the crimes negatively impacted public perception and violated MARPC 19-308.4(d) |
| Whether failure to report the charges and conviction to Bar Counsel constitutes aggravating misconduct under applicable rules | Failure to notify Bar Counsel per rule demonstrates bad-faith obstruction and aggravates sanction | Respondent did not successfully rebut that omission as mitigating | Court treated the failure to report as an aggravating factor supporting harsher sanction |
| Appropriate sanction given convictions and record | Petitioner: disbarment warranted given seriousness, violence, and aggravating factors | Respondent: argued against suspension/disbarment and sought short definite suspension if any | Court concluded disbarment appropriate to protect public confidence and due to serious criminal conduct, conviction, sentence, failure to report, and lack of extenuation |
Key Cases Cited
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Greenleaf, 438 Md. 151 (2014) (disbarment for deliberate sexual misconduct with a minor supports severe sanction for serious criminal conduct)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Sheinbein, 372 Md. 224 (2002) (disbarment where attorney aided son to flee after murder suspect charges)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Van Dusen, 443 Md. 413 (2015) (higher standard for lawyers; disbarment for failure to report convictions to bar admission)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Vanderlinde, 364 Md. 376 (2001) (disbarment appropriate for attorneys who steal or commit other serious criminal conduct)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Painter, 356 Md. 293 (1999) (disbarment for repeated acts of domestic violence against family)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Dechowitz, 358 Md. 184 (2000) (disbarment for conviction of possession with intent to distribute despite nonviolent nature)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Clinton, 308 Md. 701 (1987) (disbarment for willful tax evasion)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Kerpelman, 288 Md. 341 (1980) (suspension, not disbarment, where attorney advised client to violate court order and committed fee-related misconduct)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Reno, 436 Md. 504 (2014) (conduct prejudicial to administration of justice undermines public confidence)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Allenbaugh, 450 Md. 250 (2016) (lists aggravating/mitigating factors considered in sanctioning)