State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Gordon, 255 P.3d 423

Oklahoma Bar Association notified the Supreme Court that Gordon had been federally convicted on May 3, 2010.
Convictions included conspiracy; ten counts of wire fraud; five counts of securities fraud; five counts of money laundering; one count of making false statements; one count of obstruction of justice.
On October 29, 2010, Gordon was sentenced to 188 months in prison and ordered to pay approximately $6.15 million restitution.
Indictment alleged a scheme to artificially manipulate stock price and volume for Gordon's personal gain.
Rule 7.1 RGDP provides that a lawyer convicted of a crime evidencing unfitness is subject to discipline; the indictment, judgment, and sentence serve as the basis for discipline under Rule 7.2 RGDP.
The Court consulted Brunson, approving disbarment as the appropriate discipline for similar federal wire fraud/money laundering offenses.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the federal conviction establish unfitness to practice law?	OBA argues conviction shows unfitness.	Gordon contends conviction alone does not mandate disbarment.	Conviction demonstrates unfitness; disbarment authorized.
Is disbarment the appropriate discipline?	OBA seeks disbarment based on unfitness and precedent.	Gordon contends lesser discipline could be warranted.	Disbarment appropriate.
Do Rule 7.1 and 7.2 RGDP authorize using conviction as basis for discipline?	OBA relies on RGDP to treat conviction as basis for discipline.	Gordon may challenge application of those rules.	Rules authorize discipline from final judgment; discipline affirmed.

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Brunson, 912 P.2d 876 (Okla. 1996) (disbarment as appropriate discipline for federal convictions involving wire fraud and money laundering)