In re Disciplinary Action Against Siders, 903 N.W.2d 218

Background

Shawn Patrick Siders, an attorney, admitted (via stipulation) to soliciting a 15‑year‑old for prostitution and pleaded guilty to the related felony; he also failed to cooperate with the Director’s investigation.
The Director and Siders jointly recommended an indefinite suspension with no right to petition for reinstatement for 2 years.
The court must set an appropriate disciplinary sanction balancing public protection, deterrence, and consistency with past attorney‑discipline decisions.
The majority framed the crime as serious but less severe (maximum 5 years) than offenses in prior cases that prompted 3‑year minimum suspensions; noncooperation aggravates discipline.
The majority approved the parties’ recommended disposition: indefinite suspension effective in 14 days, no reinstatement petition for 2 years, conditions for reinstatement include professional responsibility exam, CLE, and compliance with criminal probation; $900 costs.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Director)	Defendant's Argument (Siders)	Held
Appropriate disciplinary sanction for soliciting a minor and noncooperation	Indefinite suspension with 2‑year minimum (jointly recommended) is sufficient to protect public and deter misconduct	(By stipulation) accepted allegations and waived procedural defenses; joined recommendation for 2‑year minimum	Court accepted the 2‑year minimum indefinite suspension and conditions for reinstatement
Weight of felony conviction unrelated to law practice in sanctioning	Felony conviction is serious but often results in suspension or reprimand when unrelated to practice; aggravating noncooperation supports longer suspension	N/A (stipulated facts)	Court treated crime as serious but of lower statutory gravity (5‑year max) than comparator cases, justifying shorter suspension than 3 years
Prior comparable precedents (cases involving sexual offenses against minors)	Past cases with online solicitation or sexual offenses involving minors prompted minimum 3‑year indefinite suspensions	Joint recommendation falls within range of past sanctions and merits deference to Director’s stipulation	Court distinguished those cases by greater statutory maximums and imposed 2‑year minimum instead of 3 years
Whether suspension should at least run through criminal probation	Director: deference to stipulation and not strictly bound to probation term; conditions require compliance with probation for reinstatement	Dissent: suspension should at least match remaining criminal probation to protect public	Majority: declined to tether suspension to probation term; required compliance with probation as a reinstatement condition

Key Cases Cited

In re Engel, 859 N.W.2d 788 (Minn. 2015) (discipline aims to protect public and deter misconduct)
In re Hummel, 839 N.W.2d 78 (Minn. 2013) (consider nature and cumulative weight of violations)
In re Rooney, 709 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. 2006) (consistency in attorney discipline through comparison to similar cases)
In re Pitera, 827 N.W.2d 207 (Minn. 2013) (felony convictions usually viewed as serious misconduct)
In re Farley, 771 N.W.2d 857 (Minn. 2009) (probation period is a factor considered in discipline but not dispositive)
In re Montez, 812 N.W.2d 58 (Minn. 2012) (noncooperation typically increases sanction severity)
In re Scannell, 861 N.W.2d 678 (Minn. 2015) (3‑year minimum indefinite suspension for attorney convicted of fourth‑degree criminal sexual conduct)
In re Blashack, 793 N.W.2d 437 (Minn. 2011) (3‑year minimum indefinite suspension for criminal sexual conduct conviction)
In re Riehm, 883 N.W.2d 223 (Minn. 2016) (deference given to Director’s decision to enter stipulation)
In re Singer, 735 N.W.2d 698 (Minn. 2007) (reinstatement requires clear and convincing proof of moral change)